Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-l4ctd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-11T09:16:47.390Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of stabilizing selection on the time of development in Drosophila melanogaster*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

Timothy Prout
Timothy Prout
Affiliation:
University of California, Riverside, California, U.S.A.

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.

The length of time of development, from oviposition to emergence in Drosophila melanogaster was subjected to stabilizing selection. In each generation only the individuals emerging close to the mean development time were used as parents of the next generation. This line was designated the ‘S’ line. In a parallel line disruptive selection was practised; where in each generation the earliest flies to emerge were mated to the flies last to emerge; those emerging at intermediate times were discarded. This line was designated the ‘D’ line. Two control lines were also carried, where the flies were mated at random with respect to time of emergence. The experiment extended for 40 generations and produced the following results:

(1) The variance of development time decreased in the S line and increased in the D line, relative to the control lines.

(2) The mean development time decreased in the S line and increased in the D line.

(3) The coefficients of variation decreased in the S line and increased in the D line.

(4) The viability, measured as per cent flies emerging, decreased in the D line.

Toward the end of the experiment the amount of additive genetic variance in the selected lines and in the control lines was estimated from the response to directional selection. The estimates showed that (i) the loss of total variance in the S line can be accounted for completely by a loss in additive genetic variance, and (ii) the increase in the total variance of the D line cannot be ascribed to an increase in the additive genetic variance. It was probably due to an increase in the environmental component of variance, i.e. to a loss of ‘buffering capacity’.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , November 1962 , pp. 364 - 382
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1962

References

REFERENCES

Falconer, D. S. (1957). Selection for phenotypic intermediates in Drosophila. J. Genet. 55, 551–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, D. S. & Robertson, A. (1956). Selection for environmental variability of body size in mice. Z. indukt. Abstamm.- u. VererbLehre, 87, 385–391.Google ScholarPubMed
Fraser, A. S. (1960). Simulation of genetic systems by automatic digital computers. VI. Epistasis. Aust. J. biol. Sci. 13, 150–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kojima, K. (1959). Stable equilibria for the optimum model. Proc. nat. Acad. Sci., Wash., 45, 989–993.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lerner, I. M. (1954). Genetic Homeostasis. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd.Google Scholar
Lerner, I. M. (1958). Genetic Basis of Selection. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
Mather, K. (1955). Response to selection. Cold Spr. Harb. Symp. quant. Biol. 20, 158–165.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moree, R. (1953). An effect of negative assortative mating on gene frequency. Science, 118, 600–601.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rendel, J. M. (1960). Selection for canalization of the acute phenotype in Drosophila melanogaster. Aust. J. biol. Sci. 13, 36–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, A. (1956). The effect of selection against extreme deviants based on deviation or on homozygosis. J. Genet. 54, 236–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmalhausen, I. I. (1949). Factors of Evolution: The Theory of Stabilizing Selection. Philadelphia: Blakiston Co.Google Scholar
Thoday, J. M. (1958). Effects of disruptive selection; the experimental production of a polymorphic population. Nature, Lond., 181, 1124–1125.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thoday, J. M., (1959). Effects of disruptive selection: 1. Genetic flexibility. Heredity, 13, 187–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waddington, C. H. (1957). The Strategy of the Genes. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.Google Scholar
Waddington, C. H. (1960). Experiments on canalizing selection. Genet. Res. 1, 140–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, B. & Vetukhiv, M. (1955). Adaptive organization of the gene pools of Drosophila populations. Cold Spr. Harb. Symp. quant. Biol. 20, 303–310.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wright, S. (1935). The analysis of variance and the correlation between relatives with respect to deviations from an optimum. J. Genet. 30, 243–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar