Genotype—environment interactions and the estimation of the genomic mutation rate in Drosophila melanogaster

We have studied the relative fitnesses of three genotypes of Drosophila melanogaster in 50 environments. Two genotypes, the MA lines, had accumulated mutations in the absence of natural selection over 62 generations. The third was a related strain where selection had continued to act. The environments differed in three factors: parental density, dilution of the medium, and the temperature régime and medium composition. Our measure of fitness assessed fecundity and viability relative to a reference genotype. Both MA lines always had lower fitnesses than the selected line, but the difference increased dramatically with dilution of the medium and, especially, crowding. Under the most severe conditions, the performance of the MA lines approached 0. This increased difference in harsh conditions may be caused both by a uniform increase in the magnitude of deleterious effects of all mutations and by the exposure of mutations which are essentially neutral under benign conditions. If the second cause is important, previous experiments are likely to have underestimated the genomic deleterious mutation rate in Drosophila melanogaster more than previously thought.

[1]  T. Mukai,et al.  The genetic structure of natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster. XX. Comparison of genotype-environment interaction in viability between a northern and a southern population. , 1987, Genetics.

[2]  J. H. Sang POPULATION GROWTH IN DROSOPHILA CULTURES , 1950 .

[3]  R. Lewontin THE EFFECTS OF POPULATION DENSITY AND COMPOSITION ON VIABILITY IN DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER , 1955 .

[4]  B. Charlesworth,et al.  Genetic variation in recombination in Drosophila. I. Responses to selection and preliminary genetic analysis , 1985, Heredity.

[5]  M. Ashburner,et al.  laboratory culture of Drosophila , 1978 .

[6]  J. Sved An estimate of heterosis in Drosophila melanogaster. , 1971, Genetical research.

[7]  B. Charlesworth,et al.  The genomic mutation rate for fitness in Drosophila , 1994, Nature.

[8]  T. Dobzhansky,et al.  Genetics of Natural Populations. Xi. Manifestation of Genetic Variants in Drosophila Pseudoobscura in Different Environments. , 1944, Genetics.

[9]  Fitness and density-dependent population growth in Drosophila melanogaster. , 1981, Genetics.

[10]  J. R. King,et al.  Experimental Studies on Relative Viability in Drosophila Melanogaster. , 1961, Genetics.

[11]  J. Gillespie The causes of molecular evolution , 1991 .

[12]  B. Charlesworth,et al.  The effects of spontaneous mutation on quantitative traits. I. Variances and covariances of life history traits. , 1994, Genetics.

[13]  K. Bakker An Analysis of Factors Which Determine Success in Competition for Food Among Larvae of Drosophila Melanogaster , 1962 .

[14]  R. D. Cook,et al.  The genetic structure of natural populations , 1969 .

[15]  M. A. Russell The ecological genetics of growth in Drosophila , 1969 .

[16]  E. Zouros,et al.  The use of allelic isozyme variation for the study of heterosis. , 1987, Isozymes.

[17]  T. Dobzansky Genetic structure of natural populations. , 1946, Year book - Carnegie Institution of Washington.

[18]  A. Place,et al.  Kinetic characterization of the lactate dehydrogenase (LDH-B4) allozymes of Fundulus heteroclitus. , 1984, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[19]  S. Wright,et al.  Genetics of Natural Populations. Xii. Experimental Reproduction of Some of the Changes Caused by Natural Selection in Certain Populations of Drosophila Pseudoobscura. , 1946, Genetics.

[20]  B. Charlesworth,et al.  The genomic mutation rate for fitness in Drosophila , 1992, Nature.

[21]  M. R. Dudash RELATIVE FITNESS OF SELFED AND OUTCROSSED PROGENY IN A SELF‐COMPATIBLE, PROTANDROUS SPECIES, SABATIA ANGULARIS L. (GENTIANACEAE): A COMPARISON IN THREE ENVIRONMENTS , 1990, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[22]  M. Kimura The Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution: Introduction , 1983 .

[23]  Bruce Wallace Topics in population genetics. , 1968 .

[24]  T MUKAI,et al.  THE GENETIC STRUCTURE OF NATURAL POPULATIONS OF DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER. I. SPONTANEOUS MUTATION RATE OF POLYGENES CONTROLLING VIABILITY. , 1964, Genetics.

[25]  D. Lindsley,et al.  The Genome of Drosophila Melanogaster , 1992 .

[26]  L. Birch SELECTION IN DROSOPHILA PSEUDOOBSCURA IN RELATION TO CROWDING , 1955 .

[27]  J. Crow,et al.  Mutation rate and dominance of genes affecting viability in Drosophila melanogaster. , 1972, Genetics.

[28]  J. H. Sang,et al.  The reletion between nutrition and exhibition of the gene antennales (Drosophila melanogaster) , 1941, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B - Biological Sciences.

[29]  M. Feldman,et al.  Density-Dependent Fertility Selection in Experimental Populations of DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER. , 1981, Genetics.

[30]  F. W. Robertson The ecological genetics of growth in Drosophila 1. Body size and developmental time on different diets 1. Body size and developmental time on different diets , 1960 .

[31]  H. W. Lewis Studies on a melanoma-producing lethal in Drosophila , 1954 .

[32]  M. Kimura,et al.  The neutral theory of molecular evolution. , 1983, Scientific American.

[33]  M. C. Grant,et al.  Associations Among Protein Heterozygosity, Growth Rate, and Developmental Homeostasis , 1984 .

[34]  D. Hartl,et al.  Functional effects of PGI allozymes in Escherichia coli. , 1983, Genetics.

[35]  M. Turelli,et al.  Genotype-environment interactions and the maintenance of polygenic variation. , 1989, Genetics.