Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

Selection in different environments: effects on environmental sensitivity (reaction norm) and on mean performance

  • D. S. Falconer (a1)
Summary

To simplify the description of selection in two environments the terms ‘ antagonistic’ and ‘synergistic’ are used. Selection upwards in a bad environment or downwards in a good environment is antagonistic, the selection and the environment acting in opposite directions on the character. Synergistic selection is the reverse, upwards in a good environment or downwards in a bad, selection and environment acting in the same direction. Published experiments are reviewed to see how well they agree with two expectations. First, Jinks & Connolly (1973) showed that antagonistic selection reduces environmental sensitivity and synergistic selection increases it. The experiments reviewed showed many exceptions to this rule, but they all showed that sensitivity was less after antagonistic than after synergistic selection. This is shown to be simply the consequence of correlated responses being less than direct responses. Second, I suggested (Falconer, 1989) that antagonistic selection might be the best way to improve the mean performance in the two environments. In the experiments reviewed, antagonistic selection was significantly better than synergistic for changing the mean, but it is now shown that there is no theoretical justification for this expectation; if one type of selection is better in one direction the other ought to be better in the other direction.

Expressions are given for the changes of mean performance and of sensitivity resulting from selection in one or other environment; these changes can be predicted from the parameters of the base population. In the experiments reviewed, an increase of mean performance accounted for 49% or more of the upward response. Equations are presented which allow the variance of mean performance, the variance of sensitivity, and the covariance of mean with sensitivity to be derived from parameters estimated in an unselected population, namely the variances in the two environments and the corresponding covariance. The variance of sensitivity that might be ascribed to scale effects is deduced. Directional selection in a single macro-environment is synergistic with respect to the micro-environmental differences, and is expected to increase environmental sensitivity and consequently to increase environmental variance. Stabilizing selection is antagonistic selection in both directions at the same time, and so is expected to decrease environmental variance.

    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Selection in different environments: effects on environmental sensitivity (reaction norm) and on mean performance
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Selection in different environments: effects on environmental sensitivity (reaction norm) and on mean performance
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Selection in different environments: effects on environmental sensitivity (reaction norm) and on mean performance
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
References
Hide All
Dalton, D. C. (1967). Selection for growth in mice on two diets. Animal Production 9, 425434.
Druger, M. (1962). Selection and body size in Drosophila pseudoobscura at different temperatures. Genetics 47, 209222.
Falconer, D. S. (1960). Selection of mice for growth on high and low planes of nutrition. Genetical Research 1, 91113.
Falconer, D. S. (1989). Introduction to Quantitative Genetics, 3rd edn.Longman.
Falconer, D. S. & Latyszewski, M. (1952). The environment in relation to selection for size in mice. Journal of Genetics 51, 6780.
Fowler, S. H. & Ensminger, M. E. (1960). Interactions between genotype and plane of nutrition in selection for rate of gain in swine. Journal of Animal Science 19, 434449.
Friars, G. W., Nayak, B. N., Jui, P. Y. & Raktoe, B. L. (1971). An investigation of genotype × environment interaction in relation to a selection experiment in Tribolium castaneum. Canadian Journal of Genetics and Cytology 13, 144154.
James, J. W. (1961). Selection in two environments. Heredity 16, 145152.
Jinks, J. L. & Connolly, V. (1973). Selection for specific and general response to environmental differences. Heredity 30, 3340.
Jinks, J. L. & Pooni, H. S. (1988). The genetic basis of environmental sensitivity. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Quantitative Genetics (ed. Weir, B. S., Eisen, E. J., Goodman, M. M. & Namkoong, G.), pp. 505522. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass. U.S.A.
Kaufman, P. K., Enfield, F. D. & Comstock, R. E. (1977). Stabilizing selection for pupa weight in Tribolium castaneum. Genetics 87, 327341.
Korkman, N. (1961). Selection for size in mice in different nutritional environments. Hereditas 47, 342356.
Mather, K. & Jinks, J. L. (1982). Biometrical Genetics, 3rd edn.Chapman & Hall, London.
Lynch, C. B., Sulzbach, D. S. & Connolly, M. S. (1988). Quantitative-genetic analysis of temperature regulation in Mus domesticus. IV. Pleiotropy and genotype-by-environment interaction. The American Naturalist 132, 521537.
Nielsen, V. H. & Andersen, S. (1987). Selection for growth on normal and reduced protein diets in mice. Genetical Research 50, 715.
Orozco, F. (1976). A dynamic study of genotype-environment interaction with egg laying of Tribolium castaneum. Heredity 37, 157171.
Park, Y. I., Hansen, C. T., Chung, C. S. & Chapman, A. B. (1966). Influence of feeding regime on the effects of selection for postweaning gain in the rat. Genetics 54, 13151327.
Robertson, F. W. (1960). The ecological genetics of growth in Drosophila. 2. Selection for large body size on different diets. Genetical Research 1, 305318.
Rutledge, J. J., Eisen, E. J. & Legates, J. E. (1973). An experimental evaluation of genetic correlation. Genetics 75, 709726.
Simmonds, N. W. (1984). Decentralized selection. Sugar Cane 6, 810.
Sørensen, P. (1980). Results of selection in broilers reared on different suboptimal feeding regimes. XXII British Poultry Breeders Roundtable, 1980, Birmingham.
Thompson, S. R. & Rook, S. K. (1988). Lack of a correlated response to canalizing selection in Drosophila melanogaster. Journal of Heredity 79, 385386.
Via, S. & Lande, R. (1985). Genotype-environment interaction and the evolution of phenotypic plasticity. Evolution 39, 505522.
Yamada, Y. & Bell, A. E. (1969). Selection for larval growth in Tribolium under two levels of nutrition. Genetical Research 13, 175195.
Yüksel, E., Hill, W. G. & Roberts, R. C. (1981). Selection for efficiency of feed utilization in growing mice. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 59, 129137.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Genetics Research
  • ISSN: 0016-6723
  • EISSN: 1469-5073
  • URL: /core/journals/genetics-research
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed