Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T16:50:17.086Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - Some attempts at measuring natural selection by malaria

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2009

Anthony J. Boyce
Affiliation:
University of Oxford
C. G. Nicholas Mascie-Taylor
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Get access

Summary

Introduction

The longevity of the neutralist–selectionist controversy in population genetics reflects the difficulty of measuring the extent of natural selection in both field and laboratory studies. The advent of powerful molecular tools for genetic analysis has advanced but not resolved this issue. Although there is extensive indirect evidence suggesting a major role for selection in molecular evolution, direct measures of these selection pressures are difficult. Indeed, most selective advantages are probably too small to be measurable in practical terms. However, much may be learned about the likely nature of very weak selection pressures, and of their effects, by analysing less typical large selection pressures that are within range of current studies.

Our extensive and ever-increasing knowledge of human molecular genetic diversity makes ours a species particularly amenable to observational studies of natural selection. This knowledge combined with epidemiological and clinical surveillance offers an alternative approach to studies of experimental animals with more convenient generation times and manipulable environments. Thus, the classical example of heterozygote advantage operating in natural populations remains the resistance of human heterozygotes for haemoglobin S to severe Plasmodium falciparum malaria (Allison, 1964). Other major infectious diseases of humans have been less studied, with the exception of investigations of the major histocompatibility complex where associations have been documented for diseases caused by several major pathogens (Todd, West & McDonald, 1990; Hill et al., 1991; Brahmajothi et al., 1991; Thursz et al., 1995).

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×