4.2 Article

Humidity affects genetic architecture of heat resistance in Drosophila melanogaster

Journal

JOURNAL OF EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY
Volume 25, Issue 6, Pages 1180-1188

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2012.02506.x

Keywords

desiccation; environmental stress; genetic variation; heritability; knockdown time; parent-offspring regression; sexual dimorphism; thermal tolerance

Funding

  1. Danish Natural Sciences Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Laboratory experiments on Drosophila have often demonstrated increased heritability for morphological and life-history traits under environmental stress. We used parentoffspring comparisons to examine the impact of humidity levels on the heritability of a physiological trait, resistance to heat, measured as knockdown time at constant temperature. Drosophila melanogaster were reared under standard nonstressful conditions and heat-shocked as adults at extreme high or low humidity. Mean knockdown time was decreased in the stressful dry environment, but there was a significant sex-by-treatment interaction: at low humidity, females were more heat resistant than males, whereas at high humidity, the situation was reversed. Phenotypic variability of knockdown time was also lower in the dry environment. The magnitude of genetic correlation between the sexes at high humidity indicated genetic variation for sexual dimorphism in heat resistance. Heritability estimates based on one-parentoffspring regressions tended to be higher under desiccation stress, and this could be explained by decreased environmental variance of heat resistance at low humidity. There was no indication that the additive genetic variance and evolvability of heat resistance differed between the environments. The pattern of heritability estimates suggests that populations of D. melanogaster may have a greater potential for evolving higher thermal tolerance under arid conditions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available