Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Genetic differentiation within laboratory populations ofDrosophila pseudoobscura

  • Published:
Genetica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Populations ofDrosophila pseudoobscura Frolowa initially polymorphic for the third chromosome gene arrangements Standard (ST) and Chiricahua (CH) were allowed to colonise systems of interconnected cages in which each section was subjected to a different regime of temperature and illumination. Estimates of gross productivity and migrational tendencies revealed major differences in favourability amongst the contrasting environments offered in the component units of the three multiple environment cage systems examined. Within each group of interconnected cages migration was permitted continuously throughout the experiments. The development of genetic divergence between the interconnected subpopulations was assessed by comparison of the relative frequencies of the ST and CH gene arrangements, sex-ratio, morphology, genetic variance, developmental stability and behaviour in relation to food preference shown by each subpopulation. In each of the three systems tested significant genetic differentiation between adjoining subpopulations resulted from natural selection within 25–30 generations, in spite of high migration rates and therefore potentially high gene flow.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Band, H. T. (1963). Genetic structure of populations II. Viabilities and variances of heterozygotes in constant and fluctuating environments.Evolution 17: 307–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Band, H. T. &P. T. Ives (1961). Genetic structure of populations I. On the nature of the genetic load in the South Amherst population ofDrosophila melanogaster.Evolution 15: 198–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beardmore, J. A. (1961). Diurnal temperature fluctuation and genetic variance inDrosophila populations.Nature 189: 162–163.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Beardmore, J. A. (1963). Mutual facilitation and the fitness of polymorphic populations.Amer. Nat. 97: 69–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beardmore, J. A. &L. Levine (1963). Fitness and environmental variation I. A study of some polymorphic populations ofDrosophila pseudoobscura.Evolution 17: 121–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson, H. L. (1959). Genetic conditions which promote or retard the formation of species.Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 24: 87–105.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Clutterbuck, A. J. &J. A. Beardmore (1961). Variation in the behaviour of different genotypes ofDrosophila towards odoriferous vegetable oils.Nature 190: 1135–1136.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dobzhansky, Th. (1961). On the dynamics of chromosomal polymorphism inDrosophila. Symp. Roy. Entomol. Soc. (London)1: 30–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R. A. (1950). Statistical Methods for Research Workers. 11. ed. Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh, 354 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, I. M. (1954). Genetic Homeostasis. Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh, 134 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millicent, E. &J. M. Thoday (1960). Gene flow and divergence under disruptive selection.Science 131: 1311–1312.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Millicent, E. &J. M. Thoday (1961). Effects of disruptive selection IV. Gene flow and divergence.Heredity 16: 199–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, P. A. (1961). Fly size, emergence time and sternopleural chaeta number inDrosophila.Heredity 16: 455–473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmuson, M. (1960). Frequency of morphological deviants as a criterion of developmental stability.Hereditas 46: 511–535.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thoday, J. M. (1959). The effects of disruptive selection I. Genetic flexibility.Heredity 13: 187–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thoday, J. M. (1963). Concluding address. Symp. Roy. Entomol. Soc. (London)2 (in press).

  • Thoday, J. M. &J. B. Gibson (1962). Isolation by disruptive selection.Nature 193: 1164–1166.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, J. A. (1957). A new technique for the study of laboratory populations ofDrosophila.Nature 180: 1495.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, J. A. (1963). An experimental study of environmental influences on population structure inDrosophila. Proc. XI Int. Congr. Genetics1: 168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeve, E. C. R. &F. W. Robertson (1954). Studies in quantitative inheritance VI. Sternite chaeta number inDrosophila: a metameric quantitative character.Zeits. indukt. Abst. u. Vererbl. 86: 269–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Valen, L., L. Levine &J. A. Beardmore (1962). Temperature sensitivity of chromosomal polymorphism inDrosophila pseudoobscura.Genetica 33: 113–127.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • White, M. J. D. (1962). Genetic adaptation.Aust. Jour. Sci. 25: 179–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, S. &Th. Dobzhansky (1946). Genetics of natural populations XII. Experimental reproduction of some of the changes caused by natural selection in certain populations ofDrosophila pseudoobscura.Genetics 31: 125–156.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Zoology, University of Melbourne, Australia

    J. A. Thomson

Authors
  1. J. A. Thomson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Thomson, J.A. Genetic differentiation within laboratory populations ofDrosophila pseudoobscura . Genetica 35, 270–286 (1964). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01804895

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01804895

Keywords

Search

Navigation