Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T00:01:53.799Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Inbreeding depression and heterosis of litter size in mice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

J. C. Bowman  and
D. S. Falconer
J. C. Bowman
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, Edinburgh, 9
D. S. Falconer
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, Edinburgh, 9
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. A random bred population of mice was subjected to inbreeding and the changes of litter size, measured as the number of live young in first litters, were followed.

2. The mean litter size declined at a rate of 0·56 young per 10% increase of the inbreeding coefficient.

3. Selection for large litters within the lines during the inbreeding did not effectively reduce the rate of decline.

4. Out of twenty lines at the beginning of the inbreeding seventeen were lost by the time the inbreeding coefficient reached 76%. Two more were lost later and one survived indefinitely. The three lines that survived longest started at a level below the mean and did not decline in litter size. The one that survived indefinitely reached 99% inbreeding without dropping below the non-inbred control.

5. The three lines surviving at 81% inbreeding were crossed and the litters produced by the crossbred progeny were larger than the non-inbred control by about two young per litter. This gain from heterosis is attributable to selection among the lines on their performance as inbreds. A second and third cycle of inbreeding and crossing yielded no further progress, and the level of the first cross was never regained. This is attributable to the ineffectiveness of the selection applied and to the previous restrictions of the population size.

6. The behaviour of the lines in the inbreeding and crossing point to simple dominance rather than over-dominance at the loci causing variation of litter size.

7. This experiment suggests that, as a means of improvement of farm animals, cyclical inbreeding and crossing does not look very hopeful.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 1 , Issue 2 , July 1960 , pp. 262 - 274
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1960

References

REFERENCES

Bell, A. E., Moore, C. H. & Warren, D. C. (1955). The evaluation of new methods for the improvement of quantitative characteristics. Cold Spr. Harb. Symp. quant. Biol. 20, 197–211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cruden, D. (1949). The computation of inbreeding coefficients in closed populations. J. Hered. 40, 248–251.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dickerson, G. E. (1952). Inbred lines for heterosis tests? Heterosis (ed. Gowen, J. W.). Iowa. Pp. 330–351.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1955). Patterns of response in selection experiments with mice. Cold Spr. Harb. Symp. quant. Biol. 20, 178–196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Falconer, D. S. & Robertson, A. (1956). Selection for environmental variability of body size in mice. Z. indukt. Abstamm.- u. VererbLehre, 87, 385–391.Google ScholarPubMed
Roberts, R. C. (1960). The effects on litter size of crossing lines of mice inbred without selection. Genet. Res., 1, 239–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, A. (1952). The effect of inbreeding on the variation due to recessive genes. Genetics, 37, 189–207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed