4.5 Article

Unidirectional response to bidirectional selection on body size II. Quantitative genetics

Journal

ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
Volume 10, Issue 20, Pages 11453-11466

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ece3.6783

Keywords

animal model; artificial selection; asymmetric response; Bayesian mixed models; bivariate selection; evolvability; G matrix

Funding

  1. Regional Council of Ile-de-France under the DIM Program R2DS [I-05-098/R, 2015-1657]
  2. program Investissements d'Avenir [ANR-10-EQPX-13-01, ANR-11-INBS-0001]
  3. Research Council of Norway [RCN 251307/F20, RCN 255601/E40]
  4. IDEX SUPER (project Convergences MADREPOP) [J14U257]
  5. Rennes Metropole (AIS program) [18C0356]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Anticipating the genetic and phenotypic changes induced by natural or artificial selection requires reliable estimates of trait evolvabilities (genetic variances and covariances). However, whether or not multivariate quantitative genetics models are able to predict precisely the evolution of traits of interest, especially fitness-related, life history traits, remains an open empirical question. Here, we assessed to what extent the response to bivariate artificial selection on both body size and maturity in the medakaOryzias latipes, a model fish species, fits the theoretical predictions. Three lines (Large, Small, and Control lines) were differentially selected for body length at 75 days of age, conditional on maturity. As maturity and body size were phenotypically correlated, this selection procedure generated a bi-dimensional selection pattern on two life history traits. After removal of nonheritable trends and noise with a random effect (animal) model, the observed selection response did not match the expected bidirectional response. For body size, Large and Control lines responded along selection gradients (larger body size and stasis, respectively), but, surprisingly, the Small did not evolve a smaller body length and remained identical to the Control line throughout the experiment. The magnitude of the empirical response was smaller than the theoretical prediction in both selected directions. For maturity, the response was opposite to the expectation (the Large line evolved late maturity compared to the Control line, while the Small line evolved early maturity, while the opposite pattern was predicted due to the strong positive genetic correlation between both traits). The mismatch between predicted and observed response was substantial and could not be explained by usual sources of uncertainties (including sampling effects, genetic drift, and error inGmatrix estimates).

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available