Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T02:30:50.375Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Multilocus nonrandom associations in Drosophila melanogaster

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

J. M. Malpica  and
D. A. Briscoe
J. M. Malpica
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JN, Great Britain
D. A. Briscoe
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JN, Great Britain

Summary

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.

Seven third chromosome samples from laboratory populations and one from a wild population were classified by their genotypes at five allozyme loci and by the occurrence of lethals. The data were analysed for independence among classifications by a randomization method, and it was found that when the number of classifications is high the independence hypothesis does not hold. We have split the independence hypothesis among populations and have found that the lack of fit to the hypothesis comes mainly from the wild population. As one of our classifications was lethality, these findings seriously question the interpretation of multilocus fitness estimations. To split the independence hypothesis into interactions, the criterion of Bartlett for non-interaction with exact probability methods was used; interactions at the levels of pairs and triplets were not significant as a whole. It was not possible to carry the interaction analysis any further as the frequencies of chromosomal types were completely determined by their marginal totals at orders of interaction higher than that of triplets. Available parametric estimations of these high order interactions are therefore of dubious meaning. The analyses of chromosome samples and the temporal surveys of population cages described here, as well as data from the literature, suggest that the Est 6-Pgm region is prone to show disequilibrium.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 39 , Issue 1 , February 1982 , pp. 41 - 61
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

References

REFERENCES

Andersen, A. H. (1974). Multidimensional contingency tables. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 1, 115–127.Google Scholar
Barker, J. S. F. (1979). Inter locus interactions: A review of experimental evidence. Theoretical Population Biology 16, 323–346.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bartlett, M. S. (1935). Contingency table interactions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Suppl. 2, 248–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavener, D. R. & Clegg, M. T. (1978). Dynamics of correlated genetics systems. IV. Multilocus effects of ethanol stress environments. Genetics 90, 629–644.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Charlesworth, B. & Charlesworth, D. (1973). A study of linkage disequilibrium in populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 73, 351–359.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cochrane, B. J. & Richmond, R. C. (1980). The effects of lethal selection on the EST-6 to PGM region of chromosome 3 in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 96, 491–506.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feldman, M. W., Franklin, I. R. & Thomson, G. (1974). Selection in complex genetic systems: I. The symmetric equilibria of the three locus symmetric viability model. Genetics 76, 135–162.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feldman, M. W., Lewontin, R. C., Franklin, I. R. & Christiansen, F. B. (1975). Selection in complex genetic systems. III. An effect of allele multiplicity with two loci. Genetics 79, 333–347.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Franklin, I. R. (1971). Genetic variation at the Esterase-6 locus in Drosophila melanogaster. Drosophila Information Service, 47, 113.Google Scholar
Franklin, I. R. and Lewontin, R. C. (1970). Is the gene the unit of selection? Genetics 65, 703–734.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hill, W. G. (1974 a). Estimation of linkage disequilibrium in randomly mating populations. Heredity 33, 229–239.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hill, W. G. (1974 b). Disequilibrium among several linked neutral genes in finite population. I. Mean changes in disequilibrium. Theoretical Population Biology 5, 366–392.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hill, W. G. (1975 a). Non-random association of neutral linked genes in finite populations. In Population Genetics and Ecology (ed. Karlin, S. and Nevo, E.), pp. 339–376. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hill, W. G. (1975 b). Linkage diequilibrium among multiple neutral alleles produced by mutation in finite population. Theoretical Populations Biology 8, 117–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, W. G. and Robertson, A. (1968). Linkage disequilibrium in finite populations. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 38, 226–231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kinross, J. & Robertson, A. (1970). Egg laying and survival rates in population cages of Drosophila melanogaster. Drosophila Information Service 45, 83.Google Scholar
Lancaster, H. O. (1951). Complex contingency tables treated by the partition of χ2. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B 13, 242–249.Google Scholar
Langley, C. H. (1977). Nonrandom associations between allozymes in natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster. In Measuring Selection in Natural Populations (ed. Christiansen, F. B. and Fenchel, T. M.), pp. 263–274. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Langley, C. H., Ito, K. and Voelker, R. A. (1977). Linkage disequilibrium in natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Seasonal variation. Genetics 86, 447–454.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Langley, C. K., Tobari, Y. N. & Kojima, K. (1974). Linkage disequilibrium in natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 78, 921–936.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laurie-Ahlberg, C. C. & Weir, B. S. (1979). Allozymic variation and linkage disequilibrium in some laboratory populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics. 92, 1295–1314.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewontin, R. C. (1974). The Genetics Basis of Evolutionary change. Columbia University Press: New York.Google Scholar
Lindsley, D. L. & Grell, E. H. (1968). Genetic variations of Drosophila melanogaster. Carnegie Institute of Washington. Publication No 627.Google Scholar
Malpica, J. M. & Briscoe, D. A. (1981). Effective population number estimates of laboratory populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Experientia. (In the Press.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mukai, T., Watanabe, T. K. & Yamaguchi, O. (1974). The genetic structure of natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster. XII. Linkage disequilibrium in a large local population. Genetics 77, 771–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nei, M. (1968). The frequency distribution of lethal chromosomes in finite populations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, U.S.A. 60, 517–524.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Neimann Sørensen, A. & Robertson, A. (1961). The association between blood groups and several production characteristics in three danish cattle breeds. Acta Agriculturœ Scandinavica 11, 163–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Brien, S. J. & MacIntyre, R. J. (1971). A biochemical genetic map of Drosophila melanogaster. Drosophila Information Service 46, 89–93.Google Scholar
Ohta, T. (1971). Associative overdominance caused by linked detrimental mutations. Genetical Research 18, 277–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohta, T. & Kimura, M. (1969). Linkage disequilibrium due to random genetic drift. Genetical Research 13, 47–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poulik, M. D. (1957). Starch gel electrophoresis in a discontinuous system of buffers. Nature 180, 1477–1479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, C. R. & Prasad, R. (1970). Starch gel electrophoresis of enzymes – A compilation of recipes. Biochemical Genetics 4, 297–320.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sokal, R. F. & Rohlf, F. I. (1969). Biometry. San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
Sved, J. A. (1971). Linkage disequilibrium and homozygosity of chromosome segments in finite populations. Theoretical Population Biology 2, 125–141.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sved, J. A. & Feldman, M. W. (1973). Correlation and probability models for one and two loci. Theoretical Population Biology 4, 129–132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed