Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T07:54:44.191Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Selection under assortative mating in mice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

T. M. Sutherland ,
Patricia E. Biondini  and
L. H. Haverland
T. M. Sutherland
Affiliation:
Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, U.S.A.
Patricia E. Biondini
Affiliation:
Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, U.S.A.
L. H. Haverland
Affiliation:
Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, U.S.A.
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. Approximately 25000 mice have been produced over twelve generations of selection in nine lines. The experimental design involved a 3 × 3 factorial arrangement of direction of selection with mating system. The primary character measured was 6-week body weight.

2. Consistently high phenotypic correlations between mates have been achieved, positive in the assortative lines, negative in the disassortative lines. Correlations were low and inconsistent in direction in the random-bred lines. These correlations have had very little, if any, effect in redistributing the genetic variance as estimated from the variance component analysis; the expected higher variances in the assortative lines and expected lower variances in the disassortative lines have not appeared, thus leaving heritability unaffected.

3. Selection differentials likewise show no consistent advantage for the assortative lines, so that the progress from selection has been virtually identical in all three mating systems in each direction.

4. Assortment of mates, either positively or negatively, for characters of even moderate heritability appears to have little influence on the outcome of selection. On the other hand, selection has been singularly effective in modifying the mean 6-week weight, with progress markedly greater in the downward direction; indeed it appears that the lower limit, may already have been approximately attained.

5. Environmental effects operating in the various generations have affected all lines in remarkably consistent fashion.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 11 , Issue 2 , April 1968 , pp. 171 - 178
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1968

References

REFERENCES

Breese, E. L. (1956). The genetical consequences of assortative mating. Heredity, Lond. 10, 323–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clayton, G. A. & Robertson, A. (1957). An experimental check on quantitative genetical theory. II. The long-term effects of selection. J. Genet. 55, 152–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McBride, G. & Robertson, A. (1963). Selection using assortative mating in Drosophila melanogaster. Genet. Res. 4, 356–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeve, E. C. R. (1953). Heritability and genetic correlations in progeny tests using different mating systems. J. Genet. 51, 520–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, R. C. (1966). The limits to artificial selection for body weight in the mouse. I. The limits attained in earlier experiments. Genet. Res. 8, 347–360.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, S. P., Kyle, W. H. & Bell, A. E. (1965). The effects of mating systems and selection on pupa weight in Tribolium. Genet. Res. 6, 341–351.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wright, S. (1921). Systems of mating. III. Assortative mating based on somatic resemblance. Genetics 6, 144–161.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed