Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T16:28:10.610Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Selection of mice for growth on high and low planes of nutrition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

D. S. Falconer
D. S. Falconer
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Council Unit of Animal Genetics, 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. Two-way selection was applied to the growth of mice between 3 and 6 weeks of age when reared on a high plane of nutrition and, in another pair of lines, when reared on a low plane of nutrition. In each generation the growth of all four lines was measured on both high and low planes of nutrition.

2. Growth on the two planes of nutrition was treated as two different characters and the direct and correlated responses of each were estimated. The genetic correlation between the two characters was estimated from the responses of each of the four lines, and from the divergence between upward-and downward-selected lines. The different estimates should be the same if the theory of selection for correlated characters adequately accounts for the responses. Up to generation 7 the agreement was reasonably good, but in the later generations it was not. Four estimates of the genetic correlation up to generation 7 were: 0·75, 0·19, 0·66, 0·57.

3. There was asymmetry between the upward and downward responses, and the realized heritabilities changed over the course of the experiment; so also did the phenotypic variation. In all these respects the lines behaved differently.

4. The conclusions drawn from the final responses are summarized at the beginning of the Discussion.

5. The mice produced by selection for increased growth on low plane, but later reared on high plane, were compared with those produced by selection on high plane. Their growth was the same, but they were heavier, had less fat and more protein, and were better mothers.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , February 1960 , pp. 91 - 113
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1960

References

REFERENCES

Clayton, G. A., Knight, G. R., Morris, J. A. & Robertson, A. (1957). An experimental check on quantitative genetical theory. III. Correlated responses. J. Genet. 55, 171–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clayton, G. A., Morris, J. A. & Robertson, A. (1957). An experimental check on quantitative genetical theory. I. Short-term responses to selection. J. Genet. 55, 131–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1952). The problem of environment and selection. Amer. Nat. 86, 293–298.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
Falconer, D. S. & Robertson, A. (1956). Selection for environmental variability of body size in mice. Z. indukt. Abstamm.- u. VererbLehr., 87, 385–391.Google ScholarPubMed
Fowler, R. E. (1958). The growth and carcass composition of strains of mice selected for large and small body size. J. agric. Sci., 51, 137–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar