Modeling Problems in Conservation Genetics Using Laboratory Animals Richard Frankham

  • Richard Frankham

Conclusions

  1. 1.

    The theory that underlies many management practices and recommendations in conservation genetics is very simplistic. Consequently, it is essential that it be subjected to controlled replicated experimental evaluation.

     
  2. 2.

    Such evaluations are impractical in most wildlife species. Consequently, they are best done in laboratory animals and plants.

     
  3. 3.

    It is critical that there be an interplay between theory and experimentation in conservation genetics and conservation biology generally.

     
  4. 4.

    Studies have begun recently with laboratory animals to evaluate a range of issues in conservation genetics.

     
  5. 5.

    It is desirable that more than one laboratory animal model be used, and/or meta-analyses of wildlife data, to establish the generality of conclusions.

     
  6. 6.

    A selfing plant laboratory model needs to be developed. Arabidopsis is an obvious candidate for this role.

     
  7. 7.

    A wide range of questions in conservation genetics need to be addressed in laboratory species. Several of these are listed.

     

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Allendorf FW (1986) Genetic drift and the loss of alleles versus heterozygosity. Zoo Biology 5:181–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Backus VL, Bryant EH, Hughes CR, Meffert LM (1995) Effect of migration on inbreeding followed by selection on low-founder-number populations: implications for captive breeding. Conservation Biology 9:1216–1224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ballou J, Lacy RC (1995) Identifying genetically important individuals for management of genetic diversity in pedigreed populations. In: Ballou J, Gilpin M, Foose T. (eds) Population management for survival and recovery: analytical methods and strategies in small population conservation. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 76–111Google Scholar
  4. Borlase SC, Loebel DA, Frankham R, Nurthen RK, Briscoe DA, Daggard GE (1993) Modeling problems in conservation genetics using captive Drosophila populations: consequences of equalizing family sizes. Conservation Biology 7:122–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brakefield PM, Saccheri IJ (1994) Guidelines in conservation genetics and the use of the population cage experiments with butterflies to investigate the effects of genetic drift and inbreeding. In Loeschcke V, Tomiuk J, Jain SK (eds) Conservation genetics. Birkhäuser, Basel, Switzerland, pp 165–179Google Scholar
  6. Brewer BA, Lacy RC, Foster ML, Alaks G (1990) Inbreeding depression in insular and central populations of Peromyscus mice. Journal of Heredity 81:257–266PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Briscoe DA, Malpica JM, Robertson A, Smith GJ, Frankham R, Banks RG, Barker JSF (1992) Rapid loss of genetic variation in large captive populations of Drosophila flies: implications for the genetic management of captive populations. Conservation Biology 6:416–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Briton J, Nurthen RK, Briscoe DA, Frankham R (1994) Modelling problems in conservation genetics using captive Drosophila populations: consequences of harems. Biological Conservation 69:267–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bulmer MG (1980) The mathematical theory of quantitative genetics. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
  10. Clayton GA, Robertson A (1957) An experimental check on quantitative genetical theory. II. The long-term effects of selection. Journal of Genetics 55:152–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clayton GA, Morris JA, Robertson A (1957) An experimental check on quantitative genetical theory. I. Short-term responses to selection. Journal of Genetics 55:131–151Google Scholar
  12. Crow JF, Kimura M (1970) An introduction to population genetics theory. Harper and Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. East EM (1916) Studies on size inheritance in Nicotiana. Genetics 1:164–176PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Eisen EJ (1975) Population size and selection intensity effects on long-term selection response in mice. Genetics 79:305–323PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Falconer DS, Mackay TFC (1996) Introduction to quantitative genetics, 4th ed. Longman, Harlow, UKGoogle Scholar
  16. Fisher RA (1918) The correlation between relatives on the supposition of Mendelian inheritance. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 52:399–433Google Scholar
  17. Forney KA, Gilpin ME (1989) Spatial structure and population extinction: a study with Drosophila flies. Conservation Biology 3:45–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Frankham R (1980) Origin of genetic variation in selection lines. In: Robertson A (ed) Selection experiments in laboratory and domestic animals. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Farnham Royal, UK, pp 56–68Google Scholar
  19. Frankham R (1982) Contributions of Drosophila research to quantitative genetics and animal breeding. Proceeding of the 2nd World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production 5:43–56Google Scholar
  20. Frankham R (1983) Origin of genetic variation in selection lines. Proceedings of the Thirty-Second National Breeders’ Roundtable, St. Louis, Missouri, pp 1–18Google Scholar
  21. Frankham R (1992) Integrating technologies into animal breeding programmes. In: Moore HDM, Holt WV, Mace GM (eds) Biotechnology and the conservation of genetic diversity. Symposia of the Zoological Society of London 64. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK, pp 207–221Google Scholar
  22. Frankham R (1995a) Effective population size / adult population size ratios in wildlife: a review. Genetical Research 66:95–107Google Scholar
  23. Frankham R (1995b) Conservation genetics. Annual Review of Genetics 29:305–327CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Frankham R (1995c) Inbreeding and extinction. Conservation Biology 9:792–799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Frankham R (1995d) Genetic management of captive populations for reintroduction. In: Serena M (ed) Reintroduction biology of Australian and New Zealand fauna. Surrey Beatty and Sons, Chipping Norton, NSW, Australia pp 31–34Google Scholar
  26. Frankham R (1996) Relationship of genetic variation to population size in wildlife. Conservation Biology 10:1500–1508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Frankham R, Loebel DA (1992) Modeling problems in conservation genetics using captive Drosophila populations: rapid genetic adaptation to captivity. Zoo Biology 11:333–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Frankham R, Nurthen RK (1981) Forging links between population and quantitative genetics. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 59:251–263Google Scholar
  29. Frankham R, Briscoe DA, Nurthen RK (1978) Unequal crossing over at the rRNA locus as a source of quantitative genetic variation. Nature 272:80–81CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Frankham R, Smith GJ, Briscoe DA (1993) Effects on heterozygosity and reproductive fitness of inbreeding with and without selection on fitness in Drosophila melanogaster. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 86:1023–1027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Franklin IR (1980) Evolutionary change in small populations. In: Soulé ME, Wilcox BA (eds) Conservation biology: an evolutionary-ecological perspective. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA, pp 135–140Google Scholar
  32. Fuerst PA, Maruyama T (1986) Considerations on the conservation of alleles and of genic heterozygosity in small managed populations. Zoo Biology 5:171–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gilligan DM, Woodworth LM, Montgomery ME, Briscoe DA, Frankham R (1997) Is mutation accumulation a threat to the survival of endangered populations? Conservation Biology 11:1235–1241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hazel LN, Lush JL (1942) The efficiency of three methods of selection. Journal of Heredity 33:393–399Google Scholar
  35. Hedrick PW (1994) Purging inbreeding depression and the probability of extinction: fullsib mating. Heredity 73:363–372PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Hill WG (1981) Assessment of breeding value in selection programs. Proceeding of the Second Conference of the Australian Association of Animal Breeding and Genetics, University of Melbourne, Australia, pp 227–236Google Scholar
  37. Hill WG (1982) Predictions of response to artificial selection from new mutations. Genetical Research 40:255–278PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Hollingdale B (1971) Analyses of some genes from abdominal bristle number selection lines in Drosophila melanogaster. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 41:292–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Jimenez JA, Hughes KA, Alaks G, Graham L, Lacy RC (1994) An experimental study of inbreeding depression in a natural habitat. Science 216:271–273Google Scholar
  40. Jones LP, Frankham R, Barker JSF (1968) The effects of population size and selection intensity in selection for a quantitative character in Drosophila. II. Long-term response to selection. Genetical Research 12:249–266PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Kimura M, Crow JF (1963) On the maximum avoidance of inbreeding. Genetical Research 4:399–415Google Scholar
  42. Lande R (1995) Mutation and conservation. Conservation Biology 9:782–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lande R, Barrowclough GF (1987) Effective population size, genetic variation, and their use in population management. In: Soulé ME (ed) Viable populations for conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 87–123Google Scholar
  44. Latter BDH (1964) Selection for a threshold character in Drosophila. I. An analysis of phenotypic variance on the underlying scale. Genetical Research 5:198–210Google Scholar
  45. Leberg PL (1992) Effects of a population bottleneck on genetic diversity as measured by allozyme electrophoresis. Evolution 46:474–494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Loebel DA, Nurthen RK, Frankham R, Briscoe DA, Craven D (1992) Modeling problems in conservation genetics using captive Drosophila populations: consequences of equalizing founder representation. Zoo Biology 11:319–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lopez-Fanjul C, Caballero A (1990) The effect of artificial selection on new mutations for a quantitative trait. Proceedings of the 4th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production 13:210–218Google Scholar
  48. Lush JL (1945) Animal breeding plans, 3rd ed. Iowa State College Press, Ames, IAGoogle Scholar
  49. Margan SH, Nurthen RK, Montgomery ME, Woodworth LM, Briscoe DA, Frankham R (1998) Single large or several small? Population fragmentation in the captive management of endangered species. Zoo Biology 17:467–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Miller PS, Hedrick PW (1993) Inbreeding and fitness in captive populations: Lessons from Drosophila. Zoo Biology 12:333–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Mina NS, Sheldon BL, Yoo BH, Frankham R (1991) Heterozygosity at protein loci in inbred and outbred lines of chickens. Poultry Science 70:864–872Google Scholar
  52. Montgomery ME, Ballou JD, Nurthen RK, Briscoe DA, Frankham R (1997) Minimizing kinship in captive breeding programs. Zoo Biology 16:377–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pray, LA, Schwartz JM, Goodnight CJ, Stevens L (1994) Environmental dependency of inbreeding depression implications for conservation. Conservation Biology 8:562–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ralls K, Ballou J (1983) Extinction: lessons from zoos. In: Schonewald-Cox CM, Chambers SM, MacBryde B, Thomas WL (eds) Genetics and conservation: a reference for managing wild animal and plant populations. Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo Park, CA, pp 164–184Google Scholar
  55. Ralls K, Meadows R (1993) Breeding like flies. Nature 361:689–690CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Ralls K, Ballou J, Templeton A (1988) Estimates of lethal equivalents and the cost of inbreeding in mammals. Conservation Biology 2:185–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Reeve ECR, Robertson FW (1954) Studies in quantitative inheritance. VI. Sternite chaetae number in Drosophila: a metameric quantitative character. Zeitschrift für induktive Abstammungs-und Vererbungslehre 6:269–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Robertson A (1960) A theory of limits in artificial selection. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 153B:234–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Rumball W, Franklin IR, Frankham R, Sheldon BL (1994) Decline in heterozygosity under full sib and double first cousin inbreeding in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 136:1039–1049PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Saccheri I, Kuussaari M, Kankare M, Vikman P, Fortelius W, Hanski I (1998) Inbreeding and extinction in a butterfly metapopulation. Nature 392:491–494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Soulé ME (1980) Thresholds for survival: maintaining fitness and evolutionary potential. In: Soulé ME, Wilcox BA (eds) Conservation biology: an evolutionary-ecological perspective. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA, pp 151–169Google Scholar
  62. Spielman D, Frankham R (1992) Modeling problems in conservation genetics using captive Drosophila populations: improvement of reproductive fitness due to immigration of one individual into small partially inbred populations. Zoo Biology 11:343–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Templeton AR, Read B (1983) The elimination of inbreeding depression in a captive herd of Speke’s Gazelle. In: Schonewald-Cox CM, Chambers SM, MacBryde B, Thomas WL (eds) Genetics and conservation: a reference for managing wild animal and plant populations. Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo Park, CA, pp 241–261Google Scholar
  64. Templeton AR, Read B (1984) Factors eliminating inbreeding depression in a captive herd of Speke’s Gazelle (Gazella spekei). Zoo Biology 3:177–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Vrijenhoek RC (1994) Genetic diversity and fitness in small populations. In: Loeschcke V, Tomiuk J, Jain SK (eds) Conservation genetics. Birkhäuser, Basel, Switzerland, pp 37–53Google Scholar
  66. Woodworth LM (1996) Population size in captive breeding programs. PhD thesis, Macquarie University, Sydney, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  67. Woodworth LM, Montgomery ME, Nurthen RK, Briscoe DA, Frankham R (1994) Modelling problems in conservation genetics using Drosophila: consequences of fluctuating population sizes. Molecular Ecology 3:393–399PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Wright JW, Treadwell M, Nurthen RK, Woodworth LM, Montgomery ME, Briscoe DA, Frankham R (in press) Modelling problems in conservation genetics using Drosophila: purging is ineffective in reducing genetic load. Biodiversity and ConservationGoogle Scholar
  69. Wright S (1921) Systems of mating. I. The biometric relations between parent and off-spring. Genetics 6:111–123PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Wright S (1931) Evolution in Mendelian populations. Genetics 16:97–159PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Wright S (1969) Evolution and the genetics of populations, vol 2. The theory of gene frequencies. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, ILGoogle Scholar
  72. Wright S (1977) Evolution and the genetics of populations, vol 3. Experimental results and evolutionary deductions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, ILGoogle Scholar
  73. Yoo BH (1980) Long-term selection for a quantitative character in large replicate populations of Drosophila melanogaster. II Lethals and visible mutants with large effects. Genetical Research 35:19–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard Frankham

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations