Biochemical Genetics

, Volume 29, Issue 7–8, pp 389–401 | Cite as

Genetic differentiation ofDrosophila melanogaster populations as assessed by two-dimensional electrophoresis

  • Greg S. Spicer
  • James E. Fleming
Article

Abstract

Seven populations ofDrosophila melanogaster, representing a worldwide distribution, were compared using two-dimensional protein gel electrophoresis. A total of 611 protein spots was scored, which probably represent a sample of over 500 loci that were surveyed. Of the protein spots scored, 521 spots were found to be invariant, but another 90 spots were found to be variable among the populations. Of these variable protein spots, 12 were found to be present in only one population. All the populations, except one, had at least one protein spot restricted to itself. However, the Japanese population had by far the most, with five protein spots restricted to this one population, which has been observed in previous studies of private alleles in oriental populations. The mean genetic similarity (F) found among the seven populations was 0.965, with a range of between 0.956 and 0.977. This is similar to previous reports of lower variation found in population genetic surveys using two-dimensional electrophoresis. It was found that the historical relationships among these populations was somewhat congruent with the geographic distribution of the populations, but as in previous studies, it was not exactly coincident.

Key words

two-dimensional electrophoresis Drosophila melanogaster intraspecific phylogeny genetic variation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, N. L. (1988).Two-Dimensional Electrophoresis. Operation of the ISO-DALT System Large Scale Biology Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, N. G., and Anderson, N. L. (1978). Analytical techniques for cell fractions. XXI. Two-dimensional analysis of serum and tissue proteins: multiple isoelectric focusing.Anal. Biochem. 85331.Google Scholar
  3. Aquadro, C. F., and Avise, J. C. (1981). Genetic divergence between rodent species assessed by using two-dimensional electrophoresis.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 783784.Google Scholar
  4. Avise, J. C., Arnold, J., Ball, R. M., Bermingham, E., Lamb, T., Neigel, J. E., Reeb, C. A., and Saunders, N. C. (1987). Intraspecific phylogeography: The mitochondrial DNA bridge between population genetics and systematics.Annu. Rev. Syst. Ecol. 18489.Google Scholar
  5. Coulthart, M. B., and Singh, R. S. (1988a). Differing amounts of genetic polymorphism in testes of male accessory glands ofDrosophila melanogaster andDrosophila simulans.Biochem. Genet. 26153.Google Scholar
  6. Coulthart, M. B., and Singh, R. S. (1988b). Low genic variation in male-reproductive-tract proteins ofDrosophila melanogaster andD. simulans.Mol. Biol. Evol. 5167.Google Scholar
  7. Coulthart, M. B., and Singh, R. S. (1988c). High level of divergence of male-reproductive-tract proteins, betweenDrosophila melanogaster and its sibling species,D. simulans.Mol. Biol. Evol. 5182.Google Scholar
  8. Coyne, J. A., and Milstead, B. (1987). Long-distance migration ofDrosophila. 3. Dispersal ofD. melanogaster alleles from a Maryland orchard.Am. Nat. 13070.Google Scholar
  9. Dice, L. R. (1941). Measures of the amount of ecologic association between species.Ecology 26297.Google Scholar
  10. Felsenstein, J. (1985). Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap.Evolution 39783.Google Scholar
  11. Guevara, J., Johnston, D. A., Ramagali, L. S., Martin, B. A., Capetillo, S., and Rodriguez, L. V. (1982). Quantitative aspects of silver deposition in proteins resolved in complex polyacrylamide gels.Electrophoresis 3197.Google Scholar
  12. Hale, L. R., and Singh, R. S. (1986). Extensive variation and heteroplasmy in size of mitochondrial DNA among geographic populations ofDrosophila melanogaster.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 838813.Google Scholar
  13. Harrison, H. H. (1984). Improved record keeping and photography of silver-stained two-dimensional electrophoretograms by way of “XRD images.”Clin. Chem. 301981.Google Scholar
  14. Hendy, M. D., and Penny, D. (1982). Branch and bound algorithms to determine minimal evolutionary trees.Math. Biosci. 59277.Google Scholar
  15. Lee, C.-Y., Charles, D., Bronson, D., Griffen, M., and Bennett, L. (1979). Analyses of mouse andDrosophila proteins by two-dimensional gel electrophoresis.Mol. Gen. Genet. 174303.Google Scholar
  16. Leigh Brown, A. J., and Langley, C. H. (1979). Reevaluation of genic heterozygosity in natural populations ofDrosophila melanogaster by two-dimensional electrophoresis.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 762381.Google Scholar
  17. Lewontin, R. C. (1974).Genetic Basis of Evolutionary Change Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  18. Margush, T., and McMorris, F. R. (1981). Consensus n-trees.Bull. Math. Biol. 43239.Google Scholar
  19. Mickevich, M. F., and Johnson, M. S. (1976). Congruence between morphological and allozyme data in evolutionary inference and character evolution.Syst. Zool. 25260.Google Scholar
  20. Mickevich, M. F., and Mitter, C. (1981). Treating polymorphic characters in systematics: A phylogenetic treatment of electrophoretic data. In Funk, F. A., and Brooks, D. R. (eds.),Advances in Cladistics Allen Press, Lawrence, Kans., pp. 45–58.Google Scholar
  21. Nei, M. (1972). Genetic distances between populations.Am. Nat. 106283.Google Scholar
  22. O'Farrell, P. H. (1975). High resolution two-dimensional electrophoresis.J. Biol. Chem. 2504007.Google Scholar
  23. Ohnishi, S., Leigh Brown, A. J., Voelker, R. A., and Langley, C. H. (1982). Estimation of genetic variability in natural populations ofDrosophila simulans by two-dimensional and starch gel electrophoresis.Genetics 100127.Google Scholar
  24. Ohnishi, S., Kawanishi, M., and Watanabe, T. K. (1983). Biochemical phylogenies ofDrosophila: Protein differences detected by two-dimensional electrophoresis.Genetica 6155.Google Scholar
  25. Prakash, S. (1977). Genetic divergence in closely related sibling speciesDrosophila pseudoobscura, Drosophila persimilis, andDrosophila miranda.Evolution 3114.Google Scholar
  26. Racine, R. R., and Langley, C. H. (1980). Genetic heterozygosity in a natural population ofMus musculus assessed using two-dimensional electrophoresis.Nature 283855.Google Scholar
  27. Rohlf, F. J. (1990).NTSYS-pc. Numerical Taxonomy and Multivariate Analysis System (ver 1.60), Exeter, Setauket, N.Y.Google Scholar
  28. Sanderson, M. J. (1989). Confidence limits on phylogenies: The bootstrap revisited.Cladistics 5113.Google Scholar
  29. Singh, R. S., and Rhomberg, L. R. (1987a). A comprehensive study of genic variation in natural populations ofDrosophila melanogaster. I. Estimates of gene flow from rare alleles.Genetics 115313.Google Scholar
  30. Singh, R. S., and Rhomberg, L. R. (1987b). A comprehensive study of genic variation in natural populations ofDrosophila melanogaster. II. Estimates of heterozygosity and patterns of geographic differentiation.Genetics 117255.Google Scholar
  31. Singh, R. S., Hickey, D. A., and David, J. (1982). Genetic differentiation between geographically distant populations ofDrosophila melanogaster.Genetics 101235.Google Scholar
  32. Singh, R. S., Choudhary, M., and David, J. (1987). Contrasting patterns of geographic variation in the cosmopolitan speciesDrosophila melanogaster andDrosophila simulans.Biochem. Genet. 2527.Google Scholar
  33. Sneath, P. H. A., and Sokal, R. R. (1973).Numerical Taxonomy W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  34. Sokal, R. R., and Sneath, P. H. A. (1963).Principles of Numerical Taxonomy W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  35. Spicer, G. S. (1988a). The effects of culture media on the two-dimensional electrophoretic pattern ofDrosophila virilis.Dros. Inf. Serv. 6774.Google Scholar
  36. Spicer, G. S. (1988b). Molecular evolution among someDrosophila species groups as indicated by two-dimensional electrophoresis.J. Mol. Evol. 27250.Google Scholar
  37. Spicer, G. S. (1991). Molecular evolution and phylogeny of theDrosophila virilis species group as inferred by two-dimensional electrophoresis.J. Mol. Evol. 33 (in press).Google Scholar
  38. Swofford, D. L. (1990).PAUP. Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (ver 3.0n), Ill. Nat. Hist. Surv., Champaign.Google Scholar
  39. Thorpe, P. A., and Dickinson, W. J. (1988). The use of regulatory patterns in constructing phylogenies.Syst. Zool. 3797.Google Scholar
  40. Whitt, G. S. (1987). Species differences in isozyme tissue patterns: their utility for systematic and evolutionary analysis. In Rattazzi, M. C., Scandalios, J. G., and Whitt, G. S. (eds.),Isozymes: Current Topics in Biological and Medical Research, Vol. 10 Alan R. Liss, New York, pp. 1–26.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Greg S. Spicer
    • 1
  • James E. Fleming
    • 1
  1. 1.Linus Pauling Institute of Science and MedicinePalo Alto

Personalised recommendations