Literature DB >> 14504246

Comparing G matrices: are common principal components informative?

Jason G Mezey1, David Houle.   

Abstract

Common principal components (CPC) analysis is a technique for assessing whether variance-covariance matrices from different populations have similar structure. One potential application is to compare additive genetic variance-covariance matrices, G. In this article, the conditions under which G matrices are expected to have common PCs are derived for a two-locus, two-allele model and the model of constrained pleiotropy. The theory demonstrates that whether G matrices are expected to have common PCs is largely determined by whether pleiotropic effects have a modular organization. If two (or more) populations have modules and these modules have the same direction, the G matrices have a common PC, regardless of allele frequencies. In the absence of modules, common PCs exist only for very restricted combinations of allele frequencies. Together, these two results imply that, when populations are evolving, common PCs are expected only when the populations have modules in common. These results have two implications: (1) In general, G matrices will not have common PCs, and (2) when they do, these PCs indicate common modular organization. The interpretation of common PCs identified for estimates of G matrices is discussed in light of these results.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14504246      PMCID: PMC1462744     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genetics        ISSN: 0016-6731            Impact factor:   4.562


  11 in total

Review 1.  The evolution of the G matrix: selection or drift?

Authors:  D Roff
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 3.821

2.  The genetic structure of female life history in D. melanogaster: comparisons among populations.

Authors:  P M Service
Journal:  Genet Res       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 1.588

3.  New tools for studying integration and modularity.

Authors:  P M Magwene
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 3.694

4.  Inbreeding changes the shape of the genetic covariance matrix in Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  P C Phillips; M C Whitlock; K Fowler
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 4.562

5.  Interpretation of the results of common principal components analyses.

Authors:  David Houle; Jason Mezey; Paul Galpern
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 3.694

6.  Is the genotype-phenotype map modular? A statistical approach using mouse quantitative trait loci data.

Authors:  J G Mezey; J M Cheverud; G P Wagner
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 4.562

7.  Comparing G matrices: a MANOVA approach.

Authors:  Derek Roff
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 3.694

8.  The Genetic Covariance between Characters Maintained by Pleiotropic Mutations.

Authors:  R Lande
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1980-01       Impact factor: 4.562

9.  The evolution of sexual dimorphism in the house finch. I. Population divergence in morphological covariance structure.

Authors:  A V Badyaev; G E Hill
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.694

10.  Quantitative genetic variation in Daphnia: temporal changes in genetic architecture.

Authors:  M E Pfrender; M Lynch
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.694

View more
  5 in total

1.  Limited plasticity in the phenotypic variance-covariance matrix for male advertisement calls in the black field cricket, Teleogryllus commodus.

Authors:  W R Pitchers; R Brooks; M D Jennions; T Tregenza; I Dworkin; J Hunt
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2013-03-27       Impact factor: 2.411

2.  A Bayesian framework for comparative quantitative genetics.

Authors:  Otso Ovaskainen; José Manuel Cano; Juha Merilä
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2008-03-22       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Bipartite life cycle of coral reef fishes promotes increasing shape disparity of the head skeleton during ontogeny: an example from damselfishes (Pomacentridae).

Authors:  Bruno Frédérich; Pierre Vandewalle
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2011-03-30       Impact factor: 3.260

4.  Rapid evolution of quantitative traits: theoretical perspectives.

Authors:  Michael Kopp; Sebastian Matuszewski
Journal:  Evol Appl       Date:  2013-12-06       Impact factor: 5.183

5.  QTL architecture of reproductive fitness characters in Brassica rapa.

Authors:  Jennifer M Dechaine; Marcus T Brock; Cynthia Weinig
Journal:  BMC Plant Biol       Date:  2014-03-18       Impact factor: 4.215

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.