Literature DB >> 17660544

Reconciling strong stabilizing selection with the maintenance of genetic variation in a natural population of black field crickets (Teleogryllus commodus).

John Hunt1, Mark W Blows, Felix Zajitschek, Michael D Jennions, Robert Brooks.   

Abstract

Genetic variation in single traits, including those closely related to fitness, is pervasive and generally high. By contrast, theory predicts that several forms of selection, including stabilizing selection, will eliminate genetic variation. Stabilizing selection in natural populations tends to be stronger than that assumed in theoretical models of the maintenance of genetic variation. The widespread presence of genetic variation in the presence of strong stabilizing selection is a persistent problem in evolutionary genetics that currently has no compelling explanation. The recent insight that stabilizing selection often acts most strongly on trait combinations via correlational selection may reconcile this problem. Here we show that for a set of male call properties in the cricket Teleogryllus commodus, the pattern of multivariate stabilizing sexual selection is closely associated with the degree of additive genetic variance. The multivariate trait combinations experiencing the strongest stabilizing selection harbored very little genetic variation while combinations under weak selection contained most of the genetic variation. Our experiment provides empirical support for the prediction that a small number of trait combinations experiencing strong stabilizing selection will have reduced genetic variance and that genetically independent trait combinations experiencing weak selection can simultaneously harbor much higher levels of genetic variance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17660544      PMCID: PMC2034650          DOI: 10.1534/genetics.107.077057

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


  32 in total

1.  Evolving evolvability.

Authors:  L Partridge; N H Barton
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2000-09-28       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 2.  Understanding quantitative genetic variation.

Authors:  N H Barton; P D Keightley
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 53.242

Review 3.  The adaptive landscape as a conceptual bridge between micro- and macroevolution.

Authors:  S J Arnold; M E Pfrender; A G Jones
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 1.082

4.  Pleiotropic model of maintenance of quantitative genetic variation at mutation-selection balance.

Authors:  Xu-Sheng Zhang; Jinliang Wang; William G Hill
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 4.562

5.  Measuring nonlinear selection.

Authors:  Mark W Blows; Robert Brooks
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2003-12-19       Impact factor: 3.926

6.  Deleterious mutations, apparent stabilizing selection and the maintenance of quantitative variation.

Authors:  A S Kondrashov; M Turelli
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 4.562

7.  Multivariate stabilizing selection and pleiotropy in the maintenance of quantitative genetic variation.

Authors:  Xu-Sheng Zhang; William G Hill
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 3.694

8.  Polygenic variation maintained by balancing selection: pleiotropy, sex-dependent allelic effects and G x E interactions.

Authors:  Michael Turelli; N H Barton
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 4.562

9.  A multilocus analysis of intraspecific competition and stabilizing selection on a quantitative trait.

Authors:  Reinhard Bürger
Journal:  J Math Biol       Date:  2004-12-20       Impact factor: 2.259

10.  Experimental evidence for multivariate stabilizing sexual selection.

Authors:  Robert Brooks; John Hunt; Mark W Blows; Michael J Smith; Luc F Bussière; Michael D Jennions
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 3.694

View more
  18 in total

Review 1.  Mate choice for genetic quality when environments vary: suggestions for empirical progress.

Authors:  Luc F Bussière; John Hunt; Kai N Stölting; Michael D Jennions; Robert Brooks
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2007-11-07       Impact factor: 1.082

2.  Characterizing the evolution of genetic variance using genetic covariance tensors.

Authors:  Emma Hine; Stephen F Chenoweth; Howard D Rundle; Mark W Blows
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2009-06-12       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  Polymorphic genes of major effect: consequences for variation, selection and evolution in Arabidopsis thaliana.

Authors:  John R Stinchcombe; Cynthia Weinig; Katy D Heath; Marcus T Brock; Johanna Schmitt
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2009-05-04       Impact factor: 4.562

4.  Patterns of quantitative genetic variation in multiple dimensions.

Authors:  Mark Kirkpatrick
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2008-08-10       Impact factor: 1.082

Review 5.  Colloquium papers: Numbering the hairs on our heads: the shared challenge and promise of phenomics.

Authors:  David Houle
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-10-26       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Why does allometry evolve so slowly?

Authors:  David Houle; Luke T Jones; Ryan Fortune; Jacqueline L Sztepanacz
Journal:  Integr Comp Biol       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 3.326

7.  Comparing G: multivariate analysis of genetic variation in multiple populations.

Authors:  J D Aguirre; E Hine; K McGuigan; M W Blows
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2013-03-13       Impact factor: 3.821

8.  Within-population variability in a moth sex pheromone blend: genetic basis and behavioural consequences.

Authors:  Astrid T Groot; Gerhard Schöfl; Ollie Inglis; Susanne Donnerhacke; Alice Classen; Antje Schmalz; Richard G Santangelo; Jennifer Emerson; Fred Gould; Coby Schal; David G Heckel
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2014-02-05       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  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

10.  The distribution and hypothesis testing of eigenvalues from the canonical analysis of the gamma matrix of quadratic and correlational selection gradients.

Authors:  Richard J Reynolds; Douglas K Childers; Nicholas M Pajewski
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2009-10-23       Impact factor: 3.694

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.