Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T11:16:49.714Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The ecological genetics of growth in Drosophila 6. The genetic correlation between the duration of the larval period and body size in relation to larval diet.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

Forbes W. Robertson
Forbes W. Robertson
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Council Unit of Animal Genetics, Institute of Animal Genetics, Edinburgh, 9
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. The low but regular positive correlation between body-size and the duration of the larval period in populations of D. melanogaster has been studied by selecting for large size or shorter development time on aseptic defined diets deficient in RNA and comparing the results with parallel selection on unrestricted yeast diets or on media in which RNA is not a limiting factor.

2. There is a striking contrast according to the nature of the diet during selection. On unrestricted diets and where RNA is adequate there is little or no evidence of correlation between the two characters, but on low RNA media there is a striking correlation whether selection is for large body size or shorter development time.

3. This contrast is accounted for in terms of particular changes in larval growth which can be divided into a first stage of growth to a critical size in the early 3rd instar and a second stage thereafter. The duration of the first stage can be greatly prolonged by inadequate diet but the duration of the later stage appears to be virtually unaffected by such variation although the amount of growth and hence final body-size, may be drastically reduced. The different diets which lead to presence or absence of correlation have enabled selection either to extend the growing period, so that the critical stage is reached later at a larger larval size, or to accelerate the growth rate in the later stage.

4. Variation in the final stage of growth predominates on unrestricted diets and is responsible for the greater part of the variation in body size in unselected populations. Stabilization of body-size about an intermediate optimum refers especially to growth in this later stage.

5. Lines selected for fast development on low RNA media are especially sensitive to minor nutritional variation. Probably only under rather special conditions is it possible to shorten the duration of the larval period and this is compatible with the importance of development time in fitness generally.

6. There is evidence that the restriction of early growth, in the 2nd instar, reduces the size of the 3rd instar mouth-parts. Such reduction is correlated with changes in adult size probably because smaller mouth-parts restrict food intake.

7. The pattern of larval growth suggests a flexible system which can be adjusted to different ecological conditions since the same body-size can be attained by adjusting the amount of growth effected before or after the critical stage. Differ ences in this respect will involve characteristic differences in reaction to environ mental variation and particular nutritional conditions are likely to influence the way in which adaptive changes are realized.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 4 , Issue 1 , February 1963 , pp. 74 - 92
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1963

References

REFERENCES

Bakker, K. (1959). Feeding period, growth and pupation in larvae of Drosophilamelanogaster. Ent. exp. & appl. 2, 171–186.Google Scholar
Beadle, G. W., Tatum, E. L. & Clancy, C. W. (1938). Food level in relation to rate of development and eye pigmentation in Drosophila melanogaster. Biol. Bull. Wood's Hole, 75, 447–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, J. M., Maynard Smith, J. & Sondhi, K. C. (1961). Asymmetrical response to selection for rate of development in Drosophila subobscura. Genet. Res.. 2, 70–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeve, E. C. R. (1954). Natural selection for body size in Drosophila. IXth Congress Genetics. Abstr. Caryologia. Suppl. vol. 1954.Google Scholar
Robertson, F. W. (1957). Studies in quantitative inheritance. XI. Genetic and environmental correlation between body size and egg production in Drosophila melanogaster. J. Genet. 55, 428–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, F. W. (1959). Gene-environment interaction in relation to the nutrition and growth of Drosophila. Biol. Contr., Univ. Texas, Pub. No. 5914, 89–98.Google Scholar
Robertson, F. W. (1960 a). The ecological genetics of growth in Drosophila. 1. Body size and developmental time on different diets. Genet. Res.. 1, 288–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, F. W. (1960 b). The ecological genetics of growth in Drosophila. 2. Selection for larger body size on different diets. Genet. Res.. 1, 305–318.Google Scholar
Robertson, F. W. (1960 c). The ecological genetics of growth in Drosophila. 3. Growth and competitive ability of strains selected on different diets. Genet. Res.. 1, 333–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, F. W. (1962). The ecological genetics of growth in Drosophila. 4. The influence of larval nutrition on the manifestation of dominance. Genet. Res.. 2, 346–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sang, J. H. (1956). The quantitative nutritional requirements of Drosophila melanogaster. J. exp. Biol. 33, 45–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sang, J. H. & Clayton, G. A. (1957). Selection for larval development time in Drosophila. J. Hered. 48, 265–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sang, J. H. (1962). Selection for rate of larval development using Drosophila melanogaster cultured axenically on deficient diets. Genet. Res.. 3, 90–99.Google Scholar