Biochemical Genetics

, Volume 3, Issue 5, pp 429–450 | Cite as

Isozyme genotype-environment relationships in natural populations of the harvester ant, Pogonomyrmex barbatus, from Texas

  • F. M. Johnson
  • Henry E. Schaffer
  • James E. Gillaspy
  • E. S. Rockwood
Article

Abstract

Three different allelic isozyme systems (two esterases, ESH and ESR, and a malic dehydrogenase, MDH) were analyzed in population samples of a species of ant, Pogonomyrmex barbatus, from Texas. Allelic frequencies were determined for several collection localities, and a number of significant differences were found. Principal component analysis was used to compare the patterns of variability of the allelic frequencies with environmental factors. Significant correlation was particularly evident with respect to weather and the pattern of variability in both esterases, and it is therefore suspected that natural selection is important in determining the allele frequency patterns. Observed and expected genotypic proportions were found in good agreement, generally, but in some localities homozygotes appeared in significantly greater numbers than expected. Heterotic selective maintenance was thus not indicated. Correlation found between patterns of variability in the enzyme systems themselves was consistent with the hypothesis that all three enzyme systems were affected by the environmental factors.

Keywords

Principal Component Analysis Environmental Factor Allelic Frequency Natural Selection Natural Population 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Burns, J. M., and Johnson, F. M. (1967). Esterase polymorphism in natural populations of a sulfur butterfly, Colias eurytheme. Science 156 93.Google Scholar
  2. Cavalli-Sforza, L. L., and Edwards, A. W. F. (1967). Phylogenetic analysis: Models and estimation procedures. Evolution 21 550.Google Scholar
  3. Crow, J. F. (1968). The cost of evolution and genetic loads. In Dronamraju, K. R. (ed.), Haldane and Modern Biology, Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, Md.Google Scholar
  4. Hubby, J. L., and Lewontin, R. C. (1966). A molecular approach to the study of genic heterozygosity. Genetics 54 577.Google Scholar
  5. Johnson, F. M., and Burns, J. M. (1966). Electrophoretic variation in esterases of Colias eurytheme (Pieridae). J. Lepidopterists' Soc. 20 207.Google Scholar
  6. Johnson, F. M., Kanapi, C. G., Richardson, R. H., Wheeler, M. R., and Stone, W. S. (1966). An analysis of polymorphisms among isozyme loci in dark and light Drosophila ananassae strains from American and Western Samoa. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 56 119.Google Scholar
  7. Johnson, F. M., Richardson, R. H., and Kambysellis, M. P. (1968). Isozyme variability in species of the genus Drosophila. III. Qualitative comparison of the esterases of D. aldrichi and D. mulleri. Biochem. Genet. 1 239.Google Scholar
  8. Kendall, M. G. (1957). A Course in Multivariate Analysis, Charles Griffin and Company Limited, London.Google Scholar
  9. King, J. L. (1967). Continuously distributed factors affecting fitness. Genetics 55 483.Google Scholar
  10. Kojima, K., and Yarbrough, K. M. (1967). Frequency dependent selection at the Esterase-6 locus in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 57 645.Google Scholar
  11. Levene, H., and Dobzhansky, T. (1958). New evidence of heterosis in naturally occurring inversion heterozygotes in Drosophila pseudoobscura. Heredity 12 37.Google Scholar
  12. Lewontin, R. C., and Hubby, J. L. (1966). A molecular approach to the study of genic heterozygosity in natural populations. II. Amount of variation and degree of heterozygosity in natural populations of Drosophila pseudoobscura. Genetics 54 595.Google Scholar
  13. Milkman, R. D. (1967). Heterosis as a major cause of heterozygosity in nature. Genetics 55 493.Google Scholar
  14. Morrison, D. F. (1967). Multivariate Statistical Methods, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York.Google Scholar
  15. Poulik, M. D. (1957). Starch gel electrophoresis in a discontinuous system of buffers. Nature 180 1477.Google Scholar
  16. Rao, C. R. (1964). The use and interpretation of principal component analysis in applied research. Sankya, Sect. A. 26 329.Google Scholar
  17. Rockwood, E. S. (1969). Enzyme variation in natural populations of Drosophila mimica. Univ. Texas Publ. (in press).Google Scholar
  18. Semeonoff, R., and Robertson, F. W. (1968). A biochemical and ecological study of plasma esterase polymorphism in natural populations of the field vole, Microtus agrestis L. Biochem. Genet. 1 205.Google Scholar
  19. Shaw, C. R. (1965). Electrophoretic variation in enzymes. Science 149 936.Google Scholar
  20. Stone, W. S., Wheeler, M. R., Johnson, F. M., and Kojima, K. (1968). Genetic variation in natural island populations of members of the Drosophila nasuta and Drosophila ananassae subgroups. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 59 102.Google Scholar
  21. Stone, W. S., Kojima, K., and Johnson, F. M. (1969). Enzyme polymorphism in animal populations. Japan. J. Genet. (in press). [Abstract in Proc. XII Intern. Congr. Genetics II: 153 (1968).]Google Scholar
  22. Sved, J. A., Reed, T. E., and Bodmer, W. F. (1967). The number of balanced polymorphisms that can be maintained in a natural population. Genetics 55 469.Google Scholar
  23. Texas Almanac and State Industrial Guide 1968–1969. (Pub. 1967). A. H. Belo Corp., Dallas, Texas.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1969

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. M. Johnson
    • 1
  • Henry E. Schaffer
    • 2
  • James E. Gillaspy
    • 3
  • E. S. Rockwood
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of GeneticsNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleigh
  2. 2.Department of GeneticsNorth Carolina State UniversityUSA
  3. 3.Department of BiologyTexas A & I UniversityKingsville
  4. 4.Department of ZoologyUniversity of ArizonaTucson

Personalised recommendations