Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T00:33:24.009Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Selection in natural populations V. Indian Rats (Rattus Rattus)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

Leigh Van Valen  and
Robin Weiss
Leigh Van Valen
Affiliation:
Department of Vertebrate Paleontology, American Museum of Natural History, New York
Robin Weiss
Affiliation:
Department of Anatomy and Embryology, University College, London

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.

In samples of sixteen populations of Rattus rattus from southern India, the oldest individuals have less variable molar widths than the younger ones. This is probably due to stabilizing selection by mortality. There is no detectable heterogeneity between sexes or teeth or among populations in this selection. Although there is no average difference between age classes in mean tooth width, the difference between age classes is heterogeneous among populations. This heterogeneity may reflect heterogeneity in directional selection or in direct environmental effects. The selection intensity on the variance is about 0·04.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 8 , Issue 3 , December 1966 , pp. 261 - 267
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1966

References

REFERENCES

Berry, R. J. (1963). Epigenetic polymorphism in wild populations of Mus micsculus. Genet. Res. 4, 193–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodhart, C. B. (1962). Variation in a colony of the snail Cepaea nemoralis (L.). J. Anim. Ecol. 31, 207–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grüneberg, H. (1961). Evidence for genetic drift in Indian rats (Rattus rattus L.). Evolution, Lancaster, Pa. 15, 259–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grüneberg, H., Bains, G. S., Berry, R. J., Riles, L., Smith, C. A. B. & Weiss, R. A. (1966). A Search for Genetic Effects of High Natural Radioactivity in South India. Med. Res. Council Special Report Series No. 307. London: H.M.S.O.Google ScholarPubMed
Kurtén, B. (1953). On the variation and population dynamics of fossil and recent mammal populations. Acta zool. fenn. 76, 1–122.Google Scholar
KurtÉn, B. (1957). A case of Darwinian selection in bears. Evolution, Lancaster, Pa. 11, 412–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
KurtÉn, B. (1958). Life and death of the Pleistocene cave bear. Acta zool.fenn. 95, 1–59.Google Scholar
Lloyd, R. E. (1909). The races of Indian rats. Rec. Indian Mus. 3, 1–100.Google Scholar
Lloyd, R. E. (1910). Further observations on the races of Indian rats. Rec. Indian Mus. 5, 105–113.Google Scholar
Van Valen, L. (1963). Selection in natural populations: Merychippus primus, a fossil horse. Nature, Lond. 197, 1181–1183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Valen, L. (1965). Selection in natural populations. III. Measurement and estimation. Evolution, Lancaster, Pa. 19, 514–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Valen, L. (1966). Selection in natural populations. IV. British housemice (Mus musculus). Genetica, 36, 119–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, S.(1965). Factor interaction and linkage in evolution. Proc. B. Soc. B, 162, 80–104.Google Scholar
Yule, G. U. & Kendall, M. G. (1950). An Introduction to the Theory of Statistics, 14th ed.London: Chas. Griffin and Co.Google Scholar