Skip to main content
Genetics logoLink to Genetics
. 1996 Mar;142(3):1045–1052. doi: 10.1093/genetics/142.3.1045

A Comparison of Isozyme and Quantitative Genetic Variation in Pinus Contorta Ssp. Latifolia by F(st)

R C Yang 1, F C Yeh 1, A D Yanchuk 1
PMCID: PMC1207004  PMID: 8849910

Abstract

We employed F-statistics to analyze quantitative and isozyme variation among five populations of Pinus contorta ssp. latifolia, a wind-pollinated outcrossing conifer with wide and continuous distribution in west North America. Estimates of population differentiation (F(ST)) for six quantitative traits were compared with the overall estimate of the differentiation (F*(ST)) from 19 isozymes that tested neutral to examine whether similar evolutionary processes were involved in morphological and isozyme differentiation. While the F(ST) estimates for specific gravity, stem diameter, stem height and branch length were significantly greater than the F*(ST) estimate, as judged from the 95% confidence intervals by bootstrapping, the F(ST) estimates for branch angle and branch diameter were indistinguishable from the F*(ST) estimate. Differentiation in stem height and stem diameter might reflect the inherent adaptation of the populations for rapid growth to escape suppression by neighboring plants during establishment and to regional differences in photoperiod, precipitation and temperature. In contrast, divergences in wood specific gravity and branch length might be correlated responses to population differentiation in stem growth. Possible bias in the estimation of F(ST) due to Hardy-Weinberg disequilibrium (F(IS) & 0), linkage disequilibrium, maternal effects and nonadditive genetic effects was discussed with special reference to P. contorta ssp. latifolia.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (841.3 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Carr A. J., Percival R. C., Rogers K., Harrington C. T. Pyoderma gangrenosum after cholecystectomy. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1986 Mar 15;292(6522):729–730. doi: 10.1136/bmj.292.6522.729. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Epperson B. K., Allard R. W. Spatial autocorrelation analysis of the distribution of genotypes within populations of lodgepole pine. Genetics. 1989 Feb;121(2):369–377. doi: 10.1093/genetics/121.2.369. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Lynch M. Design and analysis of experiments on random drift and inbreeding depression. Genetics. 1988 Nov;120(3):791–807. doi: 10.1093/genetics/120.3.791. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Podolsky R. H., Holtsford T. P. Population structure of morphological traits in Clarkia dudleyana. I. Comparison of FST between allozymes and morphological traits. Genetics. 1995 Jun;140(2):733–744. doi: 10.1093/genetics/140.2.733. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Prout T., Barker J. S. F statistics in Drosophila buzzatii: selection, population size and inbreeding. Genetics. 1993 May;134(1):369–375. doi: 10.1093/genetics/134.1.369. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Robertson A. The Effect of Inbreeding on the Variation Due to Recessive Genes. Genetics. 1952 Mar;37(2):189–207. doi: 10.1093/genetics/37.2.189. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Spitze K. Population structure in Daphnia obtusa: quantitative genetic and allozymic variation. Genetics. 1993 Oct;135(2):367–374. doi: 10.1093/genetics/135.2.367. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Wright S. The Theoretical Variance within and among Subdivisions of a Population That Is in a Steady State. Genetics. 1952 May;37(3):312–321. doi: 10.1093/genetics/37.3.312. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Genetics are provided here courtesy of Oxford University Press

RESOURCES