Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T05:16:19.461Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Selection for rate of larval development using Drosophila melanogaster cultured axenically on deficient diets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

James H. Sang
James H. Sang
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Council Poultry Research Centre, Edinburgh 9, Scotland
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. The problem of improving rate of larval development of Drosophila by selecting for this ‘character’ on deficient diets is examined by culturing larvae axenically on low-casein and low-pyridoxine media. Under these conditions it is possible to develop strains which grow faster than the parent population.

2. Selection for fast- and slow-growing larvae on a low-pyridoxine diet proceeds with a realized heritability of about 20%, but progress ceases after eight to nine generations. The selected larvae show no alteration of pyridoxine requirements up to the tenth generation, but the lines develop at different rates under optimal conditions. This difference is exaggerated when the diets are low in pyridoxine. By the fourteenth generation, requirements of the two lines for optimal growth have become distinct, the fast line requiring less pyridoxine than the control. Casein requirements show about the same optimum for the two lines but this is lower than that of the control, foundation population.

3. Selection for fast- and slow-development lines on a low-casein diet continues to be effective throughout the fifteen generations of the test. The realized heritability in this case is about 10%. The optimal requirements of the two lines are the same, and there is little difference in their development rates when reared on this optimal diet. The response is found only under sub-optimal conditions, both of deficiency and of excess casein. Pyridoxine requirements do not seem to be altered in the two lines.

4. Crosses between the selected lines show that each genotype has its own optimal environment, as judged by pyridoxine and casein requirements. Crosses among the lines after fourteen generations show that all the hybrids are superior to the mid-parent and three grew faster than the better parent. Other environments would have given different results.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , February 1962 , pp. 90 - 109
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1962

References

REFERENCES

Clarke, J. M., Maynard Smith, J. & Sondhi, K. C. (1961). Asymmetrical response to selection for rate of development in Drosophila subobscura. Genet. Res. 2, 70–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, D. S. & Latyszewski, M. (1952). The environment in relation to selection for size in mice. J. Genet. 51, 67–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, H. T. (1959). Minimal nutritional requirements of the German Roach (Blatella Germanica). Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 77, 290–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hollingsworth, M. J. & Maynard Smith, J. (1955). The effects of inbreeding on rate of development and on fertility in Drosophila subobscura. J. Genet. 53, 295–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, F. W. (1959). Gene-environment interactions in relation to the nutrition and growth of Drosophila. Biol. Contr. Univ. Texas, Pub. No. 5914, 89–98.Google Scholar
Robertson, F. W. (1960 a). The ecological genetics of growth in Drosophila. 1. Body size and developmental time on different diets. Genet. Res. 1, 288–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, F. W. (1960 b). The ecological genetics of growth in Drosophila. 2. Selection for large body size on different diets. Genet. Res., 1, 305–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, F. W. & Reeve, E. C. R. (1955). Studies in quantitative inheritance. VIII. Further analysis of heterosis in crosses between inbred lines of Drosophila melanogaster. Z. indukt. Abstamm.- u. VererbLehre, 86, 439–458.Google ScholarPubMed
Sang, J. H. (1956). The quantitative nutritional requirements of Drosophila melanogaster. J. exp. Biol. 33, 45–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sang, J. H. (1959). Circumstances affecting the nutritional requirements of Drosophila melanogaster. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 77, 352–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sang, J. H., McDonald, J. M. & Gordon, C. (1949). The ecological determinants of population growth in a Drosophila culture. VI. The total population count. Physiol. Zoöl. 22, 223–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sang, J. H. & Clayton, G. A. (1957). Selection for larval development time in Drosophila. J. Hered. 48, 265–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sang, J. H. & King, R. C. (1961). Nutritional requirements of axenically cultured Drosophila melanogaster adults. J. exp. Biol. (in press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultz, F. T. (1953). Concurrent inbreeding and selection in the domestic fowl. Heredity, 7, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sokal, R. R. & Hunter, P. E. (1958). Environmentally caused fluctuations in quantitative characters of Drosophila. Proc. 10th Int. Congr. Ent. 2, 843–854.Google Scholar
Williams, R. J. (1956). Biochemical Individuality. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar