Fluctuating Asymmetry in Mus musculus Subspecific Hybridization
The traditional approach to fluctuating asymmetry (FA) is compared with an application of the Procrustes superposition method. This comparison was performed on wild-derived and random bred strains of two house mouse subspecies, Mus musculus domesticus and M. m. musculus, originated from Denmark, and their hybrids in a controlled experiment. Results obtained with the Procrustes method show a decrease of FA for the hybrid sample, which is consistent with what was expected from previous FA studies on wild populations. However, no trend was detectable using the traditional approach in that specific case. Additionally, the observed levels of FA compared with those found in wild populations of the hybrid zone in Denmark suggest that the latter are under higher environmental stress than are laboratory-reared animals.
KeywordsHybrid Zone House Mouse Fluctuate Asymmetry Directional Asymmetry Hybrid Sample
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Auffray, J.-C., P. Alibert, C. Latieule, and B. Dod. Relative warp analysis of skull shape across the hybrid zone of the house mouse (Mus musculus) in Denmark. Journal of Zoology, London (in press).Google Scholar
- Auffray, J.-C., J. T. Marshall, L. Thaler, and F. Bonhomme. 1990a. Focus on the nomenclature of European species of Mus. Mouse Genome 88: 7–8.Google Scholar
- Bookstein, F. L. 1991. Morphometric tools for landmark data: geometry and biology. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.Google Scholar
- Boursot, P., F. Bonhomme, J. Britton-Davidian, J. Catalan, and H. Yonekawa 1984. Introgression différentielle des génomes nucléaires et mitochondriaux chez deux semi-espèces de souris. Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences, Paris. 299: 365–370.Google Scholar
- Graham, J. H. 1992. Genomic coadaptation and developmental stability in hybrid zone. Acta Zoologica Fennica 191: 121–131.Google Scholar
- Leamy, L. 1992. Morphometric studies in inbred and hybrid mouse. VII. heterosis in fluctuating asymmetry at different ages. Acta Zoologica Fennica 191: 111–120.Google Scholar
- Lebreton, J.-D., J.-P. Roux, G. Banco, and A.-M. Bakou. 1992. Biomeco (Biometry-Ecology), v. 4. 2. Statistical Ecology Software. Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive, CNRS: MontpellierGoogle Scholar
- Lerner, I. M. 1954. Genetic homeostasis. Wiley: New York.Google Scholar
- Rohlf, F. J. 1990. Rotational fit (Procrustes) methods. Pages 227–236 in F. J. Rohlf and F. Bookstein. (eds.), Proceedings of the Michigan morphometrics workshop. University of Michigan Museum of Zoology Special Publication 2.Google Scholar