4.8 Article

Covariation of larval gene expression and adult body size in natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster

期刊

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 20, 期 11, 页码 1760-1766

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msg179

关键词

global gene expression; larval gene expression; adult body weight; quantitative trait evolution

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Understanding adaptive phenotypic variation is one of the most fundamental problems in evolutionary biology. Genes involved in adaptation are most likely those that affect traits most intimately connected to fitness: life-history traits. The genetics of quantitative trait variation (including life histories) is still poorly understood, but several studies suggest that (I) quantitative variation might be the result of variation in gene expression, rather than protein evolution, and (2) natural variation in gene expression underlies adaptation. The next step in studying the genetics of adaptive phenotypic variation is therefore an analysis of naturally occuring covariation of global gene expression and a life-history trait. Here, we report a microarray study addressing the covariation in larval gene expression and adult body weight, a life-history trait involved in adaptation. Natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster show adaptive geographic variation in adult body size, with larger animals at higher latitudes. Conditions during larval development also affect adult size with larger flies emerging at lower temperatures. We found statistically significant differences in normalized larval gene expression between geographic populations at one temperature (genetic variation) and within geographic populations between temperatures (developmental plasticity). Moreover, larval gene expression correlated highly with adult weight, explaining 81% of its natural variation. Of the genes that show a correlation of gene expression with adult weight, most are involved in cell growth or cell maintenance or are associated with growth pathways.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据