Skip to main content
Genetics logoLink to Genetics
. 1999 Dec;153(4):1775–1787. doi: 10.1093/genetics/153.4.1775

A comparison of the genetic basis of wing size divergence in three parallel body size clines of Drosophila melanogaster.

A S Gilchrist 1, L Partridge 1
PMCID: PMC1460863  PMID: 10581284

Abstract

Body size clines in Drosophila melanogaster have been documented in both Australia and South America, and may exist in Southern Africa. We crossed flies from the northern and southern ends of each of these clines to produce F(1), F(2), and first backcross generations. Our analysis of generation means for wing area and wing length produced estimates of the additive, dominance, epistatic, and maternal effects underlying divergence within each cline. For both females and males of all three clines, the generation means were adequately described by these parameters, indicating that linkage and higher order interactions did not contribute significantly to wing size divergence. Marked differences were apparent between the clines in the occurrence and magnitude of the significant genetic parameters. No cline was adequately described by a simple additive-dominance model, and significant epistatic and maternal effects occurred in most, but not all, of the clines. Generation variances were also analyzed. Only one cline was described sufficiently by a simple additive variance model, indicating significant epistatic, maternal, or linkage effects in the remaining two clines. The diversity in genetic architecture of the clines suggests that natural selection has produced similar phenotypic divergence by different combinations of gene action and interaction.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (197.1 KB).

Selected References

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

  1. Anderson W. W. Further evidence for coadaptation in crosses between geographic populations of Drosophila pseudoobscura. Genet Res. 1968 Dec;12(3):317–330. doi: 10.1017/s0016672300011903. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Cavicchi S., Guerra D., Giorgi G., Pezzoli C. Temperature-Related Divergence in Experimental Populations of DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER. I. Genetic and Developmental Basis of Wing Size and Shape Variation. Genetics. 1985 Apr;109(4):665–689. doi: 10.1093/genetics/109.4.665. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Chai C K. Analysis of Quantitative Inheritance of Body Size in Mice. II. Gene Action and Segregation. Genetics. 1956 Mar;41(2):165–178. doi: 10.1093/genetics/41.2.165. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Clarke B. C., Shelton P. R., Mani G. S. Frequency-dependent selection, metrical characters and molecular evolution. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1988 Jul 6;319(1196):631–640. doi: 10.1098/rstb.1988.0070. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Guerra D., Pezzoli M. C., Giorgi G., Garoia F., Cavicchi S. Developmental constraints in the Drosophila wing. Heredity (Edinb) 1997 Dec;79(Pt 6):564–571. doi: 10.1038/hdy.1997.200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Hard J. J., Bradshaw W. E., Holzapfel C. M. Epistasis and the genetic divergence of photoperiodism between populations of the pitcher-plant mosquito, Wyeomyia smithii. Genetics. 1992 Jun;131(2):389–396. doi: 10.1093/genetics/131.2.389. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. James A. C., Azevedo R. B., Partridge L. Cellular basis and developmental timing in a size cline of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics. 1995 Jun;140(2):659–666. doi: 10.1093/genetics/140.2.659. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. James A. C., Azevedo R. B., Partridge L. Genetic and environmental responses to temperature of Drosophila melanogaster from a latitudinal cline. Genetics. 1997 Jul;146(3):881–890. doi: 10.1093/genetics/146.3.881. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Keightley P. D. Models of quantitative variation of flux in metabolic pathways. Genetics. 1989 Apr;121(4):869–876. doi: 10.1093/genetics/121.4.869. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Mohamed A H. Inheritance of Quantitative Characters in Zea Mays. I. Estimation of the Number of Genes Controlling the Time of Maturity. Genetics. 1959 Jul;44(4):713–724. doi: 10.1093/genetics/44.4.713. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Robertson F W. Studies in Quantitative Inheritance. Xii. Cell Size and Number in Relation to Genetic and Environmental Variation of Body Size in Drosophila. Genetics. 1959 Sep;44(5):869–896. doi: 10.1093/genetics/44.5.869. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Stalker H. D. Chromosome studies in wild populations of D. melanogaster. Genetics. 1976 Feb;82(2):323–347. doi: 10.1093/genetics/82.2.323. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Thomas-Orillard M. Modifications of Mean Ovariole Number, Fresh Weight of Adult Females and Developmental Time in DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER Induced by Drosophila C Virus. Genetics. 1984 Aug;107(4):635–644. doi: 10.1093/genetics/107.4.635. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Genetics are provided here courtesy of Oxford University Press

RESOURCES