Genetic analyses of pupation distance in Drosophila melanogaster

Sokolowski, Marla B.; Bauer, Sharon J.

doi:10.1038/hdy.1989.26

Cited by 30 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nonetheless, our results confirm and further refine previous reports of a strong chromosome 2 influence on pupation position variation as observed across different strains and assays. [16][17][18] Using quantitative complementation we further resolved the QTL to region 56A01-C11, an area containing approximately 39 annotated genes (Table 2). 39 Although many of these loci are of unknown function, several present intriguing candidate genes that we plan to investigate further in our ongoing studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Besides chromosome 2, previous studies have attributed significant influences on pupation position to chromosomes 3 and X. [16][17][18] Individual pupation position assay. Two strains classified as either near or far pupators in the group assay (RI strains 70 and 43, respectively) continued to express similar pupation site preference phenotypes when tested individually.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…10,[15][16][17][18][19] Towards the ultimate goal of understanding the integrations and interactions of these effects to produce and/or maintain phenotypic variation, it is helpful to focus on the genetic and environmental components separately. Various environmental effects have been described in previous studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Genetic and Behavioral Analysis of Natural Variation inDrosophila melanogasterPupation Position

Riedl

Riedl²,

Mackay³

et al. 2007

Fly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Genetic and Behavioral Analysis of Natural Variation inDrosophila melanogasterPupation Position

Riedl

Riedl²,

Mackay³

et al. 2007

Fly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The for gene does not have pleiotropic effects on these traits, although phenotypic correlations between larval path length and pupation behavior have been found in natural populations (51). Pupation height and larval feeding rate are polygenic characters influenced by many genes with additive effects on the major autosomes in D. melanogaster (23,(52)(53)(54)(55). From the perspective of larval fitness, feeding and moving are two of the most important behaviors performed in the larval period.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution of foraging behavior inDrosophilaby density-dependent selection

Sokolowski

Pereira²,

Hughes³

1997

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

212

166

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the rare examples of a single major gene underlying a naturally occurring behavioral polymorphism is the foraging locus of Drosophila melanogaster. Larvae with the rover allele, for R , have significantly longer foraging path lengths on a yeast paste than do those homozygous for the sitter allele, for s . These variants do not differ in general activity in the absence of food. The evolutionary significance of this polymorphism is not as yet understood. Here we examine the effect of high and low animal rearing densities on the larval foraging path-length phenotype and show that density-dependent natural selection produces changes in this trait. In three unrelated base populations the long path (rover) phenotype was selected for under high-density rearing conditions, whereas the short path (sitter) phenotype was selected for under low-density conditions. Genetic crosses suggested that these changes resulted from alterations in the frequency of the for s allele in the low-density-selected lines. Further experiments showed that density-dependent selection during the larval stage rather than the adult stage of development was sufficient to explain these results. Densitydependent mechanisms may be sufficient to maintain variation in rover and sitter behavior in laboratory populations.Studies of population dynamics have for the most part mistakenly considered the behavior of organisms within a population to be homogeneous (1). However, individual differences in behavior are common and have consequences for the ecology and evolution of populations. A special case of individual differences is behavioral polymorphism, where individuals within a population can be categorized into morphs (phenotypes or strategists) according to their behavior(s). When the polymorphism has a heritable component, the relative selective advantages of the morphs under different environmental conditions can be measured (2). One condition, population density, varies over time and space and plays a significant role in the evolution of characteristics within populations (3). Population density affects a number of processes, for example, predator-prey (4) and parasite-host interactions (5), the spread of disease (6), competition (7), population regulation (8), and territoriality (9). There have been many theoretical studies of density-dependent selection, including those that model its effect on competitive ability (10-13). However, empirical studies that address whether behavioral polymorphisms affect fitness in a density-dependent manner are rare. The fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster is one of the few systems in which we are beginning to have a detailed empirical understanding of density-dependent selection (14-22). It is an ideal model system to study how a genetically characterized polymorphism in behavior responds to density-dependent selection.The rover͞sitter polymorphism in D. melanogaster is a model system that has been used to address both the mechanistic and evolutionary significance of behavioral phenotypes. The locomotio...

show abstract

“…Ideally, a study of hybrid behaviour involves a complete diallel analysis of at least four stocks that is conducted simultaneously (Sokolowski & Bauer, 1989;Welbergen et al, 1992). However, this approach is not feasible with the large picturewinged flies because of the huge amount of time, space, and labour that is necessary for conducting a single cross.…”

Section: Inheritance Of Differences Between the Speciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inheritance of behavioural differences between two interfertile, sympatric species, Drosophila silvestris and D. heteroneura

1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Hawaiian fly species, Drosophila silvestris and D. heteroneura, are sympatric and interfertile but show strong behavioural isolation and major differences in male aggressive behaviour and the associated morphology. As a first step in elucidating the genetic control of the differences between these species, we examined the mating and aggressive behaviour of their reciprocal F 1 hybrids. The latency to the first wing vibration and the latency to copulate did not differ significantly between the parental species. However, D. heteroneura females had a very low tendency to copulate with D. silvestris males, rarely mating during the observation period. The duration of copulation also differed significantly: same-species pairs of D. silvestris had copulations that lasted about 50% longer than those of same-species pairs of D. heteroneura. The hybrids were intermediate between the parental species for both the tendency to copulate with D. silvestris males and the duration of copulation, suggesting codominance or polygenic inheritance for those traits. The aggression traits that we scored were the leg posture and wing extension during early aggression, and the leg posture and head position during escalated aggression. The parental species showed clear differences for each of these traits. The F 1 hybrids resembled one parent or the other, without showing intermediate values, suggesting single-gene dominance or threshold expression of many genes for those traits. None of the courtship or aggressive traits showed X-chromosomal effects, although the head shape of hybrids is influenced by genes on the X chromosome. It is difficult to reconcile the patterns of inheritance of aggressive behaviour and the lack of an X-chromosomal effect with the hypothesis that these traits are influenced by a coadapted gene complex.

show abstract

Genetic analyses of pupation distance in Drosophila melanogaster

Cited by 30 publications

References 18 publications

Genetic and Behavioral Analysis of Natural Variation inDrosophila melanogasterPupation Position

Genetic and Behavioral Analysis of Natural Variation inDrosophila melanogasterPupation Position

Evolution of foraging behavior inDrosophilaby density-dependent selection

Inheritance of behavioural differences between two interfertile, sympatric species, Drosophila silvestris and D. heteroneura

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About