Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-wxk4p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T18:54:38.229Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Predictions of response to artificial selection from new mutations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

William G. Hill
William G. Hill
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JN
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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.

The pattern of response expected from fixation of mutant genes for quantitative traits in finite populations is investigated for a range of distributions of mutant gene effects. The eventual rate depends on the total variance of mutant effects per generation, but the initial rate and the variance of response is higher if the distribution of mutant effects has a large standard deviation or is leptokurtic. The difference between initial and eventual rates of response is greater with large population sizes.

For a range of assumptions, new mutants are unlikely to have much influence on response for 20 or so generations, but then may contribute substantially, such that no plateaux are obtained. However, information on the variance contributed by mutants is almost entirely on bristle number in Drosophila.

It is argued that the role of new mutants should be considered in designing breeding programmes, in particular in utilizing large populations.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 40 , Issue 3 , December 1982 , pp. 255 - 278
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

References

REFERENCES

Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. & Feldman, M. W. (1981). Cultural Transmission and Evolution: a Quantitative Approach. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Clayton, G. A., Morris, J. A. & Robertson, A. (1957). An experimental check on quantitative genetical theory. I. Short-term response to selection. Journal of Genetics 55, 131–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clayton, G. A. & Robertson, A. (1955). Mutation and quantitative genetic variation. American Naturalist 89, 151–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clayton, G. A. & Robertson, A. (1957). An experimental check on quantitative genetical theory. II. The long term effects of selection. Journal of Genetics 55, 152–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clayton, G. A. & Robertson, A. (1964). The effects of X-rays on quantitative characters. Genetical Research, 5, 410–422.Google Scholar
Crow, J. F. & Kimura, M. (1970). An Introduction to Population Genetics Theory. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Dudley, J. W. (1977). Seventy-six generations of selection for oil and protein percentage in maize. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Quantitative Genetics (ed. Pollak, E., Kempthorne, O. and Bailey, T. B. Jr,), pp. 459–473. Ames: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Durrant, A. & Mather, K. (1954). Heritable variation in a long inbred line of Drosophila. Genetica 27, 97–119.Google Scholar
Eisen, E. J. (1980). Conclusions from long-term selection experiments with mice. Zeitschrift für Tierzüchtung und Züchtungsbiologie 97, 305–319.Google Scholar
Enfield, F. D. (1980). Long term effects of selection; the limits to response. In Selection Experiments in Laboratory and Domestic Animals (ed. Robertson, A.), pp. 69–86. Slough: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1981). Introduction to Quantitative Genetics, 2nd edn.London: Longman.Google Scholar
Frankham, R. (1980 a). Origin of genetic variation in selection lines. In Selection Experiments in Laboratory and Domestic Animals (ed. Robertson, A.), pp. 56–68. Slough: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.Google Scholar
Frankham, R. (1980 b). The founder effect and response to artificial selection in Drosophila. In Selection Experiments in Laboratory and Domestic Animals (ed. Robertson, A.), pp. 87–90. Slough: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.Google Scholar
Frankham, R., Briscoe, D. A. & Nurthen, R. K. (1978). Unequal crossing over at the rRNA locus as a source of quantitative genetic variation. Nature 272, 80–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frankham, R., Briscoe, D. A. & Nurthen, R. K. (1980). Unequal crossing over at the rRNA tandon as a source of quantitative genetic variation in Drosophila. Genetics 95, 727–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, W. G. (1982). Rates of change in quantitative traits from fixation of new mutations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, U.S.A. 79, 142–145.Google Scholar
Hollingdale, B. & Barker, J. S. F. (1971). Selection for increased abdominal bristle number in Drosophila melanogaster with concurrent irradiation. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 41, 208–215.Google Scholar
James, J. W. (1971). The founder effect and response to artificial selection. Genetical Research 16, 241–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, L. P., Frankham, R. & Barker, J. S. F. (1968). The effects of population size and selection intensity in selection for a quantiative character in Drosophila. II. Long-term response to selection. Genetical Research 12, 249–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitagawa, O. (1967). The effects of X-ray irradiation on selection response in Drosophila melanogaster. Japanese Journal of Genetics 42, 121–137.Google Scholar
Lande, R. (1976). The maintenance of genetic variability by mutation in a polygenic character with linked loci. Genetical Research 26, 221–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latter, B. D. H. (1965). The response to artificial selection due to autosomal genes of large effect. I. Changes of gene frequency at an additive locus. Australian Journal of Biological Science 18, 585–598.Google Scholar
Lopez-Fanjul, C. & Hill, W. G. (1973). Genetic differences between populations of Drosophila melanogaster for a quantitative trait. I. Laboratory populations. Genetical Research 22, 51–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Madalena, F. E. & Hill, W. G. (1972). Population structure in artificial selection programmes: simulation studies. Genetical Research 20, 75–99.Google Scholar
Mather, K. & Harrison, B. J. (1949). The manifold effect of selection. Heredity, 3, 1–52, 131–162.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mather, K. & Wigan, L. G. (1942). The selection of invisible mutations. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 131, 50–64.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, J. (1978). The Evolution of Sex. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Mukai, T., Chigusa, S. L., Mettler, L. E. & Crow, J. F. (1972). Mutation rate and dominance of genes affecting viability in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 72, 335–355.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ohta, T. (1980). Evolution and Variation of Multigene Families. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Paxman, G. J. (1957). A study of spontaneous mutation in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetica 29, 39–57.Google Scholar
Roberts, R. C. (1966). The limits to artificial selection for body weight in the mouse. I. The limits attained in earlier experiments. Genetical Research 8, 347–360.Google Scholar
Robertson, A. (1960). A theory of limits in artificial selection. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 153, 234–249.Google Scholar
Robertson, A. (1970). A theory of limits in artificial selection with many linked loci. In Mathematical Topics in Population Genetics (ed. Kojima, K.), pp. 246–288. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, A. (1978). The time of detection of recessive visible genes in small populations. Genetical Research 31, 255–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubin, G. M., Brorein, W. J., Dunsmuir, P., Levis, R., Strobel, E. & Young, E. (1981). ‘Copia-like’ transposable elements in the Drosophila genome. Cold Spring Harbor Symposium on Quantitative Biology 45, 619–628.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scossiroli, R. E. & Scossiroli, S. (1959). On the relative role of mutation and recombination in responses to selection for polygenic traits in irradiated populations of D. melanogaster. International Journal of Radiation Biology 1, 61–69.Google Scholar
Shrimpton, A. E. (1982). The isolation of polygenic factors controlling bristle score in Drosophila melanogaster. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Thoday, J. M. (1961). Location of polygenes. Nature, London 191, 368–370.Google Scholar
Thoday, J. M., Gibson, J. B. & Spickett, S. G. (1964). Regular responses to selection. 2. Recombination and accelerated response. Genetical Research 5, 1–19.Google Scholar
Yoo, B. H. (1980). Long term selection for a quantiative character in large replicate populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetical Research 35, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar