BACKGROUND: Expectations of repeatedly finding associations between given genes and phenotypes have been borne out by studies of parallel evolution, especially for traits involving absence or presence of characters. However, it has rarely been asked whether the genetic basis of quantitative trait variation is conserved at the intra- or even at the interspecific level. This question is especially relevant for shape, where the high dimensionality of variation seems to require a highly complex genetic architecture involving many genes. RESULTS: We analyse here the genetic effects of chromosome substitution strains carrying M. m. musculus chromosomes in a largely M. m. domesticus background on mandible shape and compare them to the results of previously published QTL mapping data between M. m. domesticus strains. We find that the distribution of genetic effects and effect sizes across the genome is consistent between the studies, while the specific shape changes associated with the chromosomes are different. We find also that the sum of the effects from the different M. m. musculus chromosomes is very different from the shape of the strain from which they were derived, as well as all known wild type shapes. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the relative chromosome-wide effect sizes are comparable between the long separated subspecies M. m. domesticus and M. m. musculus, hinting at a relative stability of genes involved in this complex trait. However, the absolute effect sizes and the effect directions may be allele-dependent, or are context dependent, i.e. epistatic interactions appear to play an important role in controlling shape.
BACKGROUND: Expectations of repeatedly finding associations between given genes and phenotypes have been borne out by studies of parallel evolution, especially for traits involving absence or presence of characters. However, it has rarely been asked whether the genetic basis of quantitative trait variation is conserved at the intra- or even at the interspecific level. This question is especially relevant for shape, where the high dimensionality of variation seems to require a highly complex genetic architecture involving many genes. RESULTS: We analyse here the genetic effects of chromosome substitution strains carrying M. m. musculus chromosomes in a largely M. m. domesticus background on mandible shape and compare them to the results of previously published QTL mapping data between M. m. domesticus strains. We find that the distribution of genetic effects and effect sizes across the genome is consistent between the studies, while the specific shape changes associated with the chromosomes are different. We find also that the sum of the effects from the different M. m. musculus chromosomes is very different from the shape of the strain from which they were derived, as well as all known wild type shapes. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the relative chromosome-wide effect sizes are comparable between the long separated subspecies M. m. domesticus and M. m. musculus, hinting at a relative stability of genes involved in this complex trait. However, the absolute effect sizes and the effect directions may be allele-dependent, or are context dependent, i.e. epistatic interactions appear to play an important role in controlling shape.
Authors: Thomas H Ehrich; Ty T Vaughn; Safina F Koreishi; Robin B Linsey; L Susan Pletscher; James M Cheverud Journal: J Exp Zool B Mol Dev Evol Date: 2003-04-15 Impact factor: 2.656
Authors: Zhiguang Su; Naoki Ishimori; Yaoyu Chen; Edward H Leiter; Gary A Churchill; Beverly Paigen; Ioannis M Stylianou Journal: J Lipid Res Date: 2009-05-12 Impact factor: 5.922
Authors: Kevin J Parsons; Young H Son; Amelie Crespel; Davide Thambithurai; Shaun Killen; Matthew P Harris; R Craig Albertson Journal: Proc Biol Sci Date: 2018-04-25 Impact factor: 5.349
Authors: Louis Boell; Luisa F Pallares; Claude Brodski; Yiping Chen; Jan L Christian; Youssef A Kousa; Pia Kuss; Sylvia Nelsen; Orna Novikov; Brian C Schutte; Ying Wang; Diethard Tautz Journal: Dev Genes Evol Date: 2013-04-06 Impact factor: 0.900