4.4 Article

Lifetime reproductive success and heritability in nature

Journal

AMERICAN NATURALIST
Volume 155, Issue 3, Pages 301-310

Publisher

UNIV CHICAGO PRESS
DOI: 10.1086/303330

Keywords

additive genetic variance; Ficedula albicollis; fitness; heritability; lifetime reproductive success; nonadditive genetic variance

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The observation that traits closely related to fitness (fitness traits) have lower heritabilities than traits more distantly associated with fitness has traditionally been framed in terms of Fisher's fundamental theorem of natural selection-fitness traits are expected to have low levels of additive genetic variance due to rapid fixation of alleles conferring highest fitness. Subsequent treatments have challenged this view by pointing out that high environmental and non-additive genetic contributions to phenotypic variation may also explain the low heritability of fitness trails. Analysis of a large data set from the collared flycatcher Ficedula albicollis confirmed a previous finding that traits closely associated with fitness tend to have lower heritability. However, analysis of coefficients of additive genetic variation (CVA) revealed that traits closely associated with fitness had higher levels of additive genetic variation (V-A) than traits more distantly associated with fitness. Hence, the negative relationship between a trait's association with fitness and its heritability was not due to lower levels of V-A in fitness traits but was due to their higher residual variance. However, whether the high residual variance was mainly due to higher levels of environmental variance or due to higher levels of nonadditive generic variance remains a challenge to be addressed by further studies. Our results are consistent with earlier suggestions that fitness-related traits may have more complex genetic architecture than traits more distantly associated with fitness.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available