Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-5wvtr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T22:02:30.493Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hybrids show parental influence in the adaptation of wild house mice to cold

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

S. A. Barnett  and
R. G. Dickson
S. A. Barnett
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, Australian National University*
R. G. Dickson
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, Australian National University*

Summary

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.

Wild house mice, Mus musculus, were bred (a) at 3 °C (‘Eskimo’) and (b) at 23 °C. Mice of the ninth generation bred at 23°C were transferred to the cold environment. Their young, and Eskimo of the same (tenth) generation, were mated to give the four possible types of pairs: controls; the two reciprocal hybrid pairings; and Eskimo. In the resulting (eleventh) generation there were therefore two hybrid classes, genetically identical but with different parentage. The growth and reproduction of the eleventh generation were studied. At all ages from birth, mice with Eskimo mothers were heavier than those with control mothers. They were also better breeders: (1) they matured earlier; (2) their litters were larger; (3) the mortality of their young in the nest was lower. In one feature there was heterosis: of the four classes, the hybrids with Eskimo mothers produced the largest litters. These and previous findings suggest rapid selection, in the cold, for changes in growth, reproductive physiology and other aspects of metabolism. The cold-adapted mice of a given generation differed from the controls partly as a result of favourable parental effects, which acted in conjunction with genetical differences. It is hypothesized that the ecological versatility of Mus musculus depends partly on the presence, in each population, of alternative genotypes which allow rapid adaptation to new conditions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 50 , Issue 3 , December 1987 , pp. 199 - 204
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

References

Al-Murrani, W. K. & Roberts, R. C. (1978). Maternal effects on body weight in mice selected for large and small size. Genetical Research 32, 295–302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barnett, S. A. (1973). Maternal processes in the cold-adaptation of mice. Biological Reviews 48, 477–508.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barnett, S. A. & Coleman, E. M. (1959). The effect of low environmental temperature on the reproductive cycle of female mice. Journal of Endocrinology 19, 232–240.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barnett, S. A., Coleman, E. M. & Manly, B. M. (1959). Oxygen consumption and body fat of mice living at −3 °C. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Physiology 44, 43–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, S. A. & Dickson, R. G. (1984 a). Changes among wild house mice (Mus musculus) bred for generations in a cold environment, and their evolutionary implications. Journal of Zoology 203, 163–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, S. A. & Dickson, R. G. (1984 b). Milk production and consumption and growth of young of wild mice after ten generations in a cold environment. Journal of Physiology 346, 409–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, S. A. & Dickson, R. G. (1985). A paternal influence on survival of wild mice in the nest. Nature, London 317, 617–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, S. A. & Dickson, R. G. (1986). Interaction of genotype and parental environment in the adaptation of wild house mice to cold. Journal of Zoology 208, 531–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, S. A. & Foster, K. A. (1981). Cold adaptation and the parent-young interactions of wild house mice, Mus musculus. Physiology and Behavior 26, 839–843.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barnett, S. A., Munro, K. M. H., Smart, J. L. & Stoddart, R. C. (1975). House mice bred for many generations in two environments. Journal of Zoology 177, 153–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, S. A. & Widdowson, E. M. (1971). Organ weights and body composition of parturient and lactating mice, and their young, at 21 °C and −3 °C. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility 26, 39–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berry, R. J. (1981). Population dynamics of the house mouse. Symposia of the Zoological Society of London 47, 395–425.Google Scholar
Berry, R. J., Jakobson, M. E. & Triggs, G. S. (1973). Survival in wild-living mice. Mammal Review 3, 46–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berry, R. J., Peters, J. & van Aarde, R. G. (1978). Sub-antarctic house mice: colonization, survival and selection. Journal of Zoology 184, 127–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brien, F. D., Sharp, G. L., Hill, W. G. & Robertson, A. (1984). Effects of selection on growth, body composition and food intake in mice. II. Correlated responses in reproduction. Genetical Research 44, 73–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bronson, F. H. (1979). The reproductive ecology of the house mouse. Quarterly Review of Biology 54, 265–299.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chitty, D. (1967). The natural selection of self-regulatory behaviour in animal populations. Proceedings of the Ecological Society of Australia 2, 51–78.Google Scholar
Chitty, D. (1977). In Evolutionary Ecology (ed. B., Stone-house and Perrins, C.), pp. 27–32. Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Drickamer, L. C. (1976). Effect of litter size and sex ratio of litter on the sexual maturation of female mice. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility 46, 369–374.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eisen, E. J. & Roberts, R. C. (1981). Postnatal maternal effects on growth and fat deposition in mice selected for large and small size. Journal of Animal Science 53, 952–965.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elliott, D. S., Legates, D. E. & Ulberg, L. C. (1968). Changes in the reproductive processes of mice selected for large and small body size. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility 17, 9–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Evans, C. S., Smart, J. L. & Stoddart, R. C. (1968). Handling methods for wild house mice and wild rats. Laboratory Animals 2, 29–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1984). Weight and age at puberty in female and male mice of strains selected for large and small body size Genetical Research 44, 47–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jakobson, M. E. (1981). Physiological adaptability: the response of the house mouse to variations in the environment. Symposia of the Zoological Society of London 47, 301–335.Google Scholar
Krebs, C. J. (1978). A review of the Chitty hypothesis of population regulation. Canadian Journal of Zoology 56, 2463–2480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Land, R. B. (1970). Genetic and phenotypic relationships between ovulation rate and body weight in the mouse. Genetical Research 15, 171–182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lynch, C. B. & Roberts, R. C. (1984). Aspects of temperature regulation in mice selected for large and small size. Genetical Research 43, 299–306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pelikán, J. (1981). Patterns of reproduction in the house mouse. Symposia of the Zoological Society of London 47, 205–229.Google Scholar
Tamarin, R. H. (1983). Animal population regulation through behavioral interactions. In Advances in the Study of Mammalian Behavior (ed. Eisenberg, J. F. and Kleiman, D. G.), pp. 698–720. Shippenberg, PA: American Society of Mammalogists.Google Scholar
Wolfe, J. L. & Barnett, S. A. (1977). Effects of cold on nest-building by wild and domestic mice, Mus musculus L. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 9, 73–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar