Skip to main content
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 2000 Mar 7;267(1442):423–430. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2000.1017

Independence between developmental stability and canalization in the skull of the house mouse.

V Debat 1, P Alibert 1, P David 1, E Paradis 1, J C Auffray 1
PMCID: PMC1690549  PMID: 10737397

Abstract

The relationship between the two components of developmental homeostasis, that is canalization and developmental stability (DS), is currently debated. To appraise this relationship, the levels and morphological patterns of interindividual variation and fluctuating asymmetry were assessed using a geometric morphometric approach applied to the skulls of laboratory samples of the house mouse. These three samples correspond to two random-bred strains of the two European subspecies of the house mouse and their F1 hybrids. The inter- and intraindividual variation levels were found to be smaller in the hybrid group compared to the parental ones, suggesting a common heterotic effect on skull canalization and DS. Both buffering mechanisms might then depend on the same genetic condition, i.e. the level of heterozygosity. However, related morphological patterns did not exhibit any congruence. In contradiction with previous studies on insect wing traits, we therefore suggest that canalization and DS may not act on the same morphological characters. The fact that this discrepancy could be related to the functional importance of the symmetry of the characters under consideration is discussed in the light of our knowledge of the genetic bases of both components of developmental homeostasis.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (230.0 KB).

Selected References

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

  1. Alibert P., Renaud S., Dod B., Bonhomme F., Auffray J. C. Fluctuating asymmetry in the Mus musculus hybrid zone: a heterotic effect in disrupted co-adapted genomes. Proc Biol Sci. 1994 Oct 22;258(1351):53–59. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1994.0141. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Eshel I., Matessi C. Canalization, genetic assimilation and preadaptation. A quantitative genetic model. Genetics. 1998 Aug;149(4):2119–2133. doi: 10.1093/genetics/149.4.2119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Kieser J. A., Groeneveld H. T., Preston C. B. Fluctuating dental asymmetry as a measure of odontogenic canalization in man. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1986 Dec;71(4):437–444. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.1330710407. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Livshits G., Yakovenko K., Kletselman L., Karasik D., Kobyliansky E. Fluctuating asymmetry and morphometric variation of hand bones. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1998 Sep;107(1):125–136. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-8644(199809)107:1<125::AID-AJPA10>3.0.CO;2-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. McKenzie J. A. Selection at the diazinon resistance locus in overwintering populations of Lucilia cuprina (the Australian sheep blowfly). Heredity (Edinb) 1994 Jul;73(Pt 1):57–64. doi: 10.1038/hdy.1994.98. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Rutherford S. L., Lindquist S. Hsp90 as a capacitor for morphological evolution. Nature. 1998 Nov 26;396(6709):336–342. doi: 10.1038/24550. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Wilkins A. S. Canalization: a molecular genetic perspective. Bioessays. 1997 Mar;19(3):257–262. doi: 10.1002/bies.950190312. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES