Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T21:29:27.419Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The ecological genetics of growth in Drosophila 4. The influence of larval nutrition on the manifestation of dominance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

Forbes W. Robertson
Forbes W. Robertson
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Council Unit of Animal Genetics, Institute of Animal Genetics, Edinburgh, 9
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

(1) Two lines have been selected for small wing cell size from the cage Pacific population. Body size was reduced by about 10% and 15% in the two lines which did not regress when selection was relaxed.

(2) The effects of crossing each line to the unselected population has been determined in a number of repeated tests on the live yeast medium and also on various sub-optimal synthetic media.

(3) The size of the F1, relative to the size of the parents, is greatly influenced by the composition of the larval diet. The F1 may coincide with the mid-parent value but generally significantly exceeds it and is often the same size as the unselected parent population.

(4) In crosses to an unselected population on alternative media the F1 was either the same size as the unselected population or exceeded it.

(5) Crosses between the selected lines produced an F1 which exceeded the larger parent but remained well below the level of the unselected population.

(6) To test for interaction between genes at different loci, chromosomes from the unselected population were substituted in the genetic background of each of the selected lines to provide an array of genotypes in which one, two or three pairs of major chromosomes had homologues derived from different strains. Leastsquares analysis indicated differences between the lines in the distribution of effects among the chromosomes together with the presence of interaction between chromosomes and this was greater for the substitutions in the line which showed the greater consistency of recessive behaviour in crosses to the unselected population.

(7) At the end of the selection experiment two lines were selected for large body size from the F2 of the cross between the two selected lines. Both responded to selection for three to four generations and then fluctuated at a level slightly below that of the unselected population.

(8) The physiological changes which involve correlated changes in body and cell size differ from those which result from selection for smaller body size, at least in the early stages of such selection, and are associated with differences in genetic behaviour. The apparently recessive property, which involves extensive non-allelic interaction, is progressively established during the course of selection. Apparently selection for smaller cell size is particularly effective in disturbing the normal homeostasis of growth and is accompanied by relatively greater loss of heterozygosis than is likely with equivalent reduction in size due to selection for smaller body as opposed to cell size.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 2 , Issue 3 , November 1961 , pp. 346 - 360
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1961

References

REFERENCES

Breese, E. L. & Mather, K. (1960). The organisation of polygenic activity within a chromosome in Drosophila. II. Viability. Heredity, 14, 375–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lerner, I. M. (1954). Genetic Homeostasis. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
Robertson, F. W. (1954). Studies in quantitative inheritance. V. Chromosome analyses of crosses between selected and unselected lines of different body size in Drosophila melanogaster. J. Genet. 52, 494–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, F. W. (1955). Selection response and the properties of genetic variation. Cold Spr. Harb. Symp. quant. Biol. 20, 166–177.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robertson, F. W. (1959 a). Studies in quantitative inheritance. XII. Cell size and number in relation to genetic and environmental variation of body size in Drosophila. Genetics, 44, 869–896.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robertson, F. W. (1959 b). Studies in quantitative inheritance. XIII. Interrelations between genetic behaviour and development in the cellular constitution of the Drosophila wing. Genetics, 44, 1113–1130.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robertson, F. W. (1960). The ecological genetics of growth in Drosophila. 1. Body size and developmental time on different diets. Genet. Res. 1, 288–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, F. W. & Reeve, E. C. R. (1952). Studies in quantitative inheritance. 1. The effects of selection of wing and thorax length in Drosophila melanogaster. J. Genet. 50, 416–448.Google Scholar
Robertson, F. W. & Reeve, E. C. R. (1954). Studies in quantitative inheritance. VIII. Further analyses of heterosis in crosses between inbred lines of Drosophila melanogaster. Z. indukt. Abstamm.-u. VererbLehre, 86, 439–458.Google Scholar
Sang, J. H. (1956). The quantitative nutritional requirements of Drosophila melanogaster. J. exp. Biol. 33, 45–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar