Mutation and conflicts between artificial and natural selection for quantitative traits

Hill, William G.; Mbaga, S.H.

doi:10.1007/978-94-011-5210-5_15

Cited by 8 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The selection response would, however, be smaller than predicted because of the antagonistic relationship between the trait value and fitness (Hill and Mbaga, 1998). …”

Section: New Variation V Losses In Small Populationsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Assessing the genetic diversity in small farm animal populations

Toro

Meuwissen

Fernández

et al. 2011

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Genetic variation is vital for the populations to adapt to varying environments and to respond to artificial selection; therefore, any conservation and development scheme should start from assessing the state of variation in the population. There are several marker-based and pedigree-based parameters to describe genetic variation. The most suitable ones are rate of inbreeding and effective population size, because they are not dependent on the amount of pedigree records. The acceptable level for effective population size can be considered from different angles leading to a conclusion that it should be at least 50 to 100. The estimates for the effective population size can be computed from the genealogical records or from demographic and marker information when pedigree data are not available. Marker information could also be used for paternity analysis and for estimation of coancestries. The sufficient accuracy in marker-based parameters would require typing thousands of markers. Across breeds, diversity is an important source of variation to rescue problematic populations and to introgress new variants. Consideration of adaptive variation brings new aspects to the estimation of the variation between populations.

show abstract

“…The selection response would, however, be smaller than predicted because of the antagonistic relationship between the trait value and fitness (Hill and Mbaga, 1998). …”

Section: New Variation V Losses In Small Populationsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Assessing the genetic diversity in small farm animal populations

Toro

Meuwissen

Fernández

et al. 2011

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, in other experiments, selection responses seem almost continuous (e.g., Weber 1990). Limits were initially thought to be due to the exhaustion of standing variation in populations; however, theoretical work (Lande 1975) showed that mutation could maintain genetic variance and this could contribute to selection responses, as validated empirically (Frankham 1980, Mackay et al 1994, Hill and Mbaga 1998. Nevertheless, selection can clearly affect the level of genetic variance in the short term, and decrease it even in natural populations of large size, as in the case of body size and condition in the Collared Flycatcher, Ficedula albicollis (Merilä et al 2001).…”

Section: Concepts and Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

A Reassessment of Genetic Limits to Evolutionary Change

Blows

Hoffmann

2005

Ecology

545

570

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An absence of genetic variance in traits under selection is perhaps the oldest explanation for a limit to evolutionary change, but has also been the most easily dismissed. We review a range of theoretical and empirical results covering single traits to more complex multivariate systems, and show that an absence of genetic variance may be more common than is currently appreciated. From a single-trait perspective, we highlight that it is becoming clear that some trait types do not display significant levels of genetic variation, and we raise the possibility that species with restricted ranges may differ qualitatively from more widespread species in levels of genetic variance in ecologically important traits. A common misconception in many life-history studies is that a lack of genetic variance in single traits, and genetic constraints as a consequence of bivariate genetic correlations, are different causes of selection limits. We detail how interpretations of bivariate patterns are unlikely to demonstrate genetic limits to selection in many cases. We advocate a multivariate definition of genetic constraints that emphasizes the presence (or otherwise) of genetic variance in the multivariate direction of selection. For multitrait systems, recent results using longer term studies of organisms, in which more is understood concerning what traits may be under selection, have indicated that selection may exhaust genetic variance, resulting in a limit to the selection response.

show abstract

“…This opinion might seem inconsistent with the pervasive contribution of epistasis to standing genetic variance for such traits (Kelly, ; Roff & Emerson, ; Huang et al ., ). Nonetheless, the architecture of standing genetic variation does not necessarily predict the response to directional selection beyond several generations, in particular if the response transgresses the original range of genotypic variation (Hill & Mbaga, ; Steppan et al ., ). Similarly, epistasis between deleterious mutations throws little light on the interaction between mutations that would mediate adaptation (de Visser et al ., ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Epistasis and maternal effects in experimental adaptation to chronic nutritional stress inDrosophila

Vijendravarma

Kawecki

2013

J of Evolutionary Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on ecological and metabolic arguments, some authors predict that adaptation to novel, harsh environments should involve alleles showing negative (diminishing return) epistasis and/or that it should be mediated in part by evolution of maternal effects. Although the first prediction has been supported in microbes, there has been little experimental support for either prediction in multicellular eukaryotes. Here we use a line-cross design to study the genetic architecture of adaptation to chronic larval malnutrition in a population of Drosophila melanogaster that evolved on an extremely nutrient-poor larval food for 84 generations. We assayed three fitness-related traits (developmental rate, adult female weight and egg-to-adult viability) under the malnutrition conditions in 14 crosses between this selected population and a nonadapted control population originally derived from the same base population. All traits showed a pattern of negative epistasis between alleles improving performance under malnutrition. Furthermore, evolutionary changes in maternal traits accounted for half of the 68% increase in viability and for the whole of 8% reduction in adult female body weight in the selected population (relative to unselected controls). These results thus support both of the above predictions and point to the importance of nonadditive effects in adaptive microevolution.

show abstract

Mutation and conflicts between artificial and natural selection for quantitative traits

Cited by 8 publications

References 40 publications

Assessing the genetic diversity in small farm animal populations

Assessing the genetic diversity in small farm animal populations

A Reassessment of Genetic Limits to Evolutionary Change

Epistasis and maternal effects in experimental adaptation to chronic nutritional stress inDrosophila

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About