Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-20T12:24:16.311Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Gene-environment interactions of the eyeless mutant in Drosophila melanogaster

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

David M. Hunt  and
Barrie Burnet
David M. Hunt
Affiliation:
Department of Genetics, University of Sheffield, England
Barrie Burnet
Affiliation:
Department of Genetics, University of Sheffield, England

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.

A method is described for quantifying the phenotypic expression of eyeless using gauged estimates of the mean and standard deviation of the distribution of facet numbers.

Gene-environment interactions of four eyeless alleles ey, ey2ey4 and eyK are compared in different genetic backgrounds and on a standardized Pacific background. The original strains differ in mean phenotypic value and in direction of response to variations in the ribonucleic acid content of the larval culture medium, whereas the four Pacific strains are more concordant. Consequently these differences are in part attributable to modifier genes present in the different genetic backgrounds of the original strains. Modifier genes also influence the periods in development at which eyeless is sensitive to nutritional treatments.

On the standardized Pacific background deficiencies of cholesterol cause an increase, whereas deficiencies of RNA or thiamine cause a decrease in the expressvity of all four eyeless alleles, but non-identity of their interaction profiles over an array of different suboptimal environments suggest that they may form a group of heteroalleles.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , June 1969 , pp. 251 - 265
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1969

References

REFERENCES

Baron, A. L. (1935). Facet number in Drosophila melanogaster as influenced by certain genetic and environmental factors. J. exp. Zool. 70, 461–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bodenstein, D. (1950). The postembryonic development of Drosophila. In Biology of Drosophila (ed. Demerec, M.), pp. 275–367. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
Bridges, C. B. & Brehme, K. S. (1944). The mutants of Drosophila melanogaster. Publs. Carnegie Instn. no. 552.Google Scholar
Burnet, B. & Sang, J. H. (1963). Dietary utilization of DNA and its derivatives by Drosophila melanogaster (Meig.) J. Insect Physiol. 9, 553–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, R. A. & Yates, F. (1953). Statistical Tables, 4th edition. London: Oliver & Boyd.Google Scholar
Hartmann-Goldstein, I. J. (1967). On the relationship between heterochromatization and variegation in Drosophila, with special reference to temperature-sensitive periods. Genet. Res. 10, 143–160.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hinton, T. (1942). A study of the interaction of alleles at the eyeless locus. Am. Nat. 76, 219–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kamshilov, M. M. (1939). Selection as a factor altering the dependence of characters on variation in environmental conditions. Dokl. Akad. Nauk. SSSR 23, 362–365.Google Scholar
Morgan, T. H. (1929). Variability of eyeless. Publs. Carnegie Instn. no. 399, 139–168.Google Scholar
Ogaki, M. (1966). Reversal effect of the genetic background on some small-eye mutants, with special reference to gene action of morphogenetic mutants in Drosophila. Genetica 37, 391–402.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sang, J. H. (1956). The quantitative nutritional requirements of Drosophila melanogaster. J. exp. Biol. 33, 45–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sang, J. H. (1957). Utilization of dietary purines and pyrimidines by Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb. 66B, 339–359.Google Scholar
Sang, J. H. (1963). Penetrance, expressivity and thresholds. J. Hered. 54, 143–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sang, J. H. & Burnet, N. (1963). Environmental modification of the eyeless phenotype in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 48, 1683–1699.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sang, J. H. & McDonald, J. M. (1954). Production of phenocopies in Drosophila using salts, particularly sodium metaborate. J. Genet. 52, 392–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sang, J. H., McDonald, J. M. & Gordon, C. (1949). The ecological determinants of population growth in a Drosophila culture. VI. The total population count. Physiol. Zoül. 22, 223–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scharloo, W. (1962). The influence of selection and temperature on a mutant character (ciD) in Drosophila melanogaster. Archs néerl. Zool. 14, 431–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scharloo, W. & Nieuwenhuijs, A. M. (1964). Temperature sensitive periods of cubitus interruptus mutants in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetica 35, 15–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, I. (1964). Differentiation of larval Drosophila eye-antennal discs in vitro. J. exp. Zool. 156, 91–104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schneider, I. (1966). Histology of larval eye-antennal disks and cephalic ganglia of Drosophila cultured in vitro. J. Embryol. exp. Morph. 15, 271–279.Google ScholarPubMed
Spofford, J. B. (1956). The relation between expressivity and selection against eyeless in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 41, 938–959.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stevens, W. L. (1948). Control by gauging. Jl R. statist. Soc. 10, 54–98.Google Scholar