Maintenance of Chromosomal Polymorphism in a Population of Drosophila pseudoobscura: Viability Under Crowded and Uncrowded Conditions

Druger, Marvin; Nickerson, Richard P.

doi:10.2307/2407007

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In 1962 the population was moved to our laboratory at Syracuse University where it was maintained thereafter at 25 C on cornmeal-agar-molasses medium. Periodic sampling showed that the inversion frequencies stabilized at 20-30% CH and 70-80% AR (Druger, 1966;Druger and Nickerson, 1972). The latest sampling (September, 1974) showed the frequencies to be 69% AR and 31% CH.…”

Section: The Experimental Populationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolutionary Divergence Between Two Populations of Drosophila pseudoobscura

Matzke¹,

Druger²

1977

Evolution

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Experimental Populationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolutionary Divergence Between Two Populations of Drosophila pseudoobscura

Matzke¹,

Druger²

1977

Evolution

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Second, the accuracy of the estimates we use is not perfect as high-accuracy experimental fitness component estimates are difficult to obtain, which specially holds for the frequency-dependent fitnesses that are implemented in the model as regression functions (Á lvarez-Castro and Alvarez 2005). Third, we lack estimates of some other fitness components, like sexdependent viability (Drugger 1966;Drugger and Nickerson 1972), frequency-dependent fecundity (Anderson and Watanabe 1997), and supergene selection (Charlesworth and Charlesworth 1975;Wasserman and Koepfer 1975) that have been detected in other Drosophila inversion polymorphisms and could therefore also affect the ST/CH inversion polymorphism to some extent.…”

Section: Predicting Population Trajectoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Yank of Dobzhansky’s Bequest

Álvarez-Castro

Carlborg

2008

Evol Biol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dobzhansky studied mechanisms of balancing selection using systems of inversions in Drosophila and he soon found that changes in inversion frequencies along generations in experimental populations conformed to the expectation for a simple model of heterosis. However, other more complex modes of selection, like rare male advantage, were later found to affect the maintenance of inversion polymorphisms. Here we show that a more realistic (and complex) model than heterosis-integrating all known fitness component estimates obtained in independent experiments for the ST/CH system of inversions in Drosophila pseudoobscura-not only conforms to but actually also predicts the inversion frequencies. This concludes this line of work and points to other selection mechanisms than heterosis that were also considered by Dobzhansky-frequency-and sex-dependent selection-as potential mechanisms of balancing selection responsible for the maintenance of the inversion polymorphisms in Drosophila.Keywords Dobzhansky Á Mechanisms of balancing selection Á Fitness components Á Drosophila Á Heterosis Theodosius Dobzhansky made good use of his diverse scientific background to become the focal point of the Synthetic Theory of Evolution. He successfully condensed

show abstract

“…San Jacinto, California. Periodic sampling showed that the inversion frequencies stabilized at 20-30% CH and 70-80% AR (Druger, 1966;Druger and Nickerson, 1972). 173 in January 1957 in the laboratory of Th.…”

Section: The Experimental Populationsmentioning

confidence: 99%