Literature DB >> 28564212

LATITUDINAL CLINE IN DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER FOR KNOCKDOWN RESISTANCE TO ETHANOL FUMES AND FOR RATES OF RESPONSE TO SELECTION FOR FURTHER RESISTANCE.

Frederick M Cohan1, Jean-Daniel Graf2.   

Abstract

We have introduced a device for selecting Drosophila for increased resistance to very high concentrations of ethanol fumes. This device has enabled us to: 1) select quickly and easily over a thousand flies at a time, and 2) score the knockdown time of every fly in the distribution, while causing very little injury to the flies. A sample of nine west coast populations of Drosophila melanogaster showed a significant trend toward higher knockdown resistance in more northern populations. A population's level of knockdown resistance was virtually uncorrelated with its alcohol dehydrogenase (Adh) allele frequencies. Five of the above nine populations were then subjected to selection for further knockdown resistance. Each population was divided randomly into four groups of 256 flies: two lines to be selected, and two lines to remain unselected as control lines. In every generation each selected line was measured for knockdown resistance, and the last quartile of flies to be knocked down was saved to continue the selection cycle. Population sizes of the selected and unselected lines were all maintained at 256. Realized heritability, based on the responses to selection of the first four generations, was calculated for each selected line. The five populations were significantly heterogeneous for heritability estimates; the average heritability of the five populations pooled was 0.143 ± 0.019. Over the course of twelve generations, the ten selected lines increased their knockdown times by an average factor of 2.40. Before selection, the five populations were heterogeneous for knockdown resistance, and resistance was greatest among the most northern populations. The amount of change of knockdown resistance over the course of selection was also correlated with latitude: the most southern population increased its knockdown time by a factor of 2.23, and the most northern population increased it by a factor of 2.55. After ten generations of selection, the cline of knockdown resistance was about 4.5 times as steep as that before selection. Small phenotypic differences among populations before selection were thus exaggerated by the action of selection. The differences among populations in their rates of response to selection were attributed to genetic differences that existed before selection. The pattern of change of Adh frequencies over the course of selection was very inconsistent, both among and within populations. From this inconsistency of change of Adh alleles with selection, and the lack of correlation between Adh frequencies and knockdown resistance before selection, we concluded that Adh frequency changes could not have had much effect on the responses of the selected lines. © 1985 The Society for the Study of Evolution.

Entities:  

Year:  1985        PMID: 28564212     DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.1985.tb05666.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Evolution        ISSN: 0014-3820            Impact factor:   3.694


  17 in total

1.  sn-Glycerol-3-phosphate oxidase and alcohol tolerance in Drosophila melanogaster larvae.

Authors:  S W McKechnie; B W Geer
Journal:  Biochem Genet       Date:  1986-12       Impact factor: 1.890

2.  Reproductive fitness and artificial selection in animal breeding: culling on fitness prevents a decline in reproductive fitness in lines of Drosophila melanogaster selected for increased inebriation time.

Authors:  R Frankham; B H Yoo; B L Sheldon
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  1988-12       Impact factor: 5.699

3.  Olfactory responses of Drosophila melanogaster selected for knockdown resistance to ethanol.

Authors:  A A Hoffmann; F M Cohan
Journal:  Behav Genet       Date:  1987-05       Impact factor: 2.805

4.  An airtight approach to the inebriometer: from construction to application with volatile anesthetics.

Authors:  Adam G Dawson; Paniz Heidari; Sudhindra R Gadagkar; Michael J Murray; Gerald B Call
Journal:  Fly (Austin)       Date:  2013-04-01       Impact factor: 2.160

5.  Ethanol tolerances of Drosophila melanogaster populations selected on different concentrations of ethanol supplemented media.

Authors:  J G Oakeshott; F M Cohan; J B Gibson
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  1985-03       Impact factor: 5.699

Review 6.  Insights from intoxicated Drosophila.

Authors:  Emily Petruccelli; Karla R Kaun
Journal:  Alcohol       Date:  2018-03-21       Impact factor: 2.405

7.  Preference for ethanol in feeding and oviposition in temperate and tropical populations of Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  Jing Zhu; James D Fry
Journal:  Entomol Exp Appl       Date:  2015-03-02       Impact factor: 2.250

8.  Thermal adaptation in Drosophila serrata under conditions linked to its southern border: unexpected patterns from laboratory selection suggest limited evolutionary potential.

Authors:  Andréa Magiafoglou; Ary Hoffmann
Journal:  J Genet       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 1.166

9.  The effect of dietary ethanol on the composition of lipids of Drosophila melanogaster larvae.

Authors:  B W Geer; S W McKechnie; M L Langevin
Journal:  Biochem Genet       Date:  1986-02       Impact factor: 1.890

10.  Observations on the extent and temporal stability of latitudinal clines for alcohol dehydrogenase allozymes and four chromosome inversions in Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  P R Anderson; W R Knibb; J G Oakeshott
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  1987-11-30       Impact factor: 1.082

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.