Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

High levels of genetic variation in Indian field and house mice

  • Published:
Journal of Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Genetic variation in the Indian pygmy field miceMus booduga and theMus terricolor complex and in the house mouseMus musculus tytleri was analysed electro phoretically at 20 enzymatic and nonenzymatic protein loci. The results show an unusually high genetic variation in the field mice in terms of per cent polymorphism (P = 75 to 90 at 0-95 level), observed heterozygosity (Ho = 0.215[ ± 0.213] to 0.314 [±0.236]) and average number of alleles(A = 2.0[± 0.858] to 2.38 [±0.868]). Very high values of P,Ho andA were also observed for the house mouse. Genetic distance (D) determined by using Nei’s (1978) formula in theM. terricolor complex ranged from the lowest,D = 0.082, betweenM. terricolor I and II to the highest,D = 0.155, betweenM. terricolor II and III. Genetic distance betweenM. booduga and theM. terricolor complex was 0-259 and that between the house mouseM. m. tytleri and theM. booduga-terricolor lineage was 0.285. TheseD values corroborate that the pygmy field and house mice are closely allied.

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

  • Avise J. C, Smith M. H. and Selander R. K. 1979 Biochemical polymorphism and systematics in the genusPeromyscus. VII. Geographic differentiation in members of thetruei andmaniculatus species groups.J. Mammal. 60: 177–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bahadur M. and Sharma T. 1996 Rapid evolution of post-zygotic reproductive isolation in theMus terricolor complex in the light of mitochondrial DNA restriction profiles. Sixth All-India Conference on Cytology and Genetics, Rohtak, India. Abstracts, p. 1

  • Benado M., Aguilera M., Reig O. A. and Ayala F. J. 1979 Biochemical genetics of chromosomal forms of Venezuelan spiny rats of theProechimys guairae andProechimys trinitatus superspecies.Genetica 50: 89–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry R. I. and Peters J. 1977 Heterogeneous heterozygosities inMus musculus populations.Proc. R. Soc. London B197: 485–503

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonhomme F., Catalan J., Britton-Davidian J., Chapman V. M, Moriwaki K., Nevo E. and Thaler L. 1984 Biochemical diversity and evolution of genusMus.Biochem. Genet. 22: 275–303

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Britton-Davidian J. 1990 Genie differentiation inM. m. domesticus populations from Europe, the Middle East and North Africa: Geographic patterns and colonization events.Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 41: 27–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Britton-Davidian J., Nadeau J. H., Croset H. and Thaler L. 1989 Genie differentiation and origin of Robertsonian populations of the house mouse (Mus musculus domesticus Rutty).Genet. Res. 53: 29–44

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Carraway L. N. and Kennedy P. K. 1993 Genetic variation inThomomys bulbivorus, an endemic to the Willamette Valley, Oregon.J. Mammal. 74: 952–962

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatterjee B., Bahadur M. and Sharma T. 1994 Mitochondrial DNA restriction maps ofMus booduga, Mus terricolor andMus musculus tytleri.J. Genet. 73: 57–64

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cheong N. 1986 Evolutionary divergence in Indian pygmy mice: Cytogenetics, habitat and behaviour studies. Ph. D. thesis, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen B. L. 1960 Genetics of plasma transferrins in the mouse.Genet. Res. 1: 431–438

    Google Scholar 

  • Din W., Anand R., Boursot P., Darviche D., Jouvin-Marche E., Dod B., Orth A., Talwar G. P., Cazenave P.-A. and Bonhomme F. 1996 Origin and radiation of the house mouse: Clues from nuclear genes.J. Evol. Biol. 9: 519–539

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ellerman J. R. 1961 InFauna of India—Vol. III. Pt. II Mammalia, Rodentia. (ed.) M. L. Roonwal (Delhi: Zoological Survey of India) pp. 483–873

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillespie J. H. and Guess H. A. 1978 A general model to account for enzyme variation in natural populations.Genetics 76: 837–848

    Google Scholar 

  • Haldane J. B. S. 1922 Sex ratio and unisexual sterility in hybrid animals. J.Genetics 12: 101–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris H. and Hopkinson D. A. 1976Handbook of enzyme electrophoresis in human genetics (Amsterdam: North-Holland)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartl D. L. 1980Principles of population genetics (Sunderland, Mass., USA: Sinauer)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedrick P. W. 1986 Genetic polymorphism in heterogeneous environments: A decade later.Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 17: 535–566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson W. E. and Selander R. K. 1971 Protein variation and systematics in kangaroo rats (GenusDipodomys).Syst. Zool. 20: 377–405

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson W. E., Selander R. K., Smith M. H. and Kim Y. J. 1972 Biochemical genetics of sibling species of cotton rat (Sigmodon). Studies in Genetics VII, University of Texas (Austin) Publications 213: 297–305

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilpatrick C. W. and Zimmerman E. G. 1976 Genetic variation and systematics of four species of thePeromyscus boylii species group.Syst. Zool. 24: 143–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewontin R. C, Ginzburg L. R. and Tuljapurkar S. D. 1978 Heterosis as an explanation for large amount of genie polymorphism.Genetics 88: 149–169

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lowry O. H., Rosebrough N. J., Farr A. L. and Randall R. J. 1951 Protein measurement with the Folin Phenol Reagent.J. Biol. Chem. 193: 265–275

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Markvong A., Marshall J. T., Pathak S. and Hsu T. C. 1975 Chromosomes and DNA ofMus: The karyotype ofMus flavidiventris andMus dunni. Cytogenet. Cell Genet. 14: 116–125

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Matthey R. and Petter F. 1968 Existence de deux especes distinctes, l’une chromosomiquement polymorphe chezdesMus indiens du groupebooduga. Etude cytogenetique et taxonomique.Rev. Suisse Zool. 75: 461–498

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Misonne X. 1969 African and Indo-Australian muridiae, evolutionary trends.Ann. Mus. R. Afr. Centr. Tervuren Zool. 172: 1–219

    Google Scholar 

  • Morton J. R. 1966 The multiple electrophoretic bands of mouse hemoglobins.Genet. Res. 7: 76–85

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Musser G. G. and Carleton M. D. 1993 Family Muridae. InMammal species of the world: A taxonomic and geographic reference, 2nd edition (eds.) D. E. Wilson and D. M. Reeder (Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution), pp. 501–756

    Google Scholar 

  • Navarro M. N. Y. and Britton-Davidian J. 1989 Genetic structure of insular Mediterranean populations of the house mouse.Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 36: 377–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nei M. 1978 Estimation of average heterozygosity and genetic distance from a small number of individuals.Genetics 89: 583–590

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nevo E. 1983 Population genetics and ecology: The interface. InEvolution from molecules to man (ed.) D. S.Bendall (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) pp. 287–321

    Google Scholar 

  • Nevo E. 1988 Genetic diversity in nature, Patterns and theory. InEvolutionary biology (eds.) M. K. Hecht and B. Wallace (New York: Plenum) vol. 23, pp. 217–246

    Google Scholar 

  • Nevo E. and Shaw C. R. 1972 Genetic variation in a subterranean mammal,Spalax ehrenbergi. Biochem. Genet. 7: 235–241

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nevo E., Kim Y. J., Shaw C. R. and Thaler C. S. Jr 1974 Genetic variation, selection and speciation inThomomys talpoides, pocket gophers.Evolution 28: 1–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nevo E., Ben-Shlomo R., Beiles A., Jarvis J. U. M. and Hickman G. C. 1987 Allozyme differentiation and systematics of the endemic subterraean mole rats of South Africa.Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 15: 489–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patnaik R., Jaeger J.-J., Affray J.-C. and Sahni A. 1996 House mouse ancestor from late Pliocene Siwalik sediments of India.C. R. Acad. Set, Paris 319: 431–434

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Patton J. L. and Yang S. Y. 1977 Genetic variation inThomomys bottae pocket gophers: Macrogeographic patterns.Evolution 31: 697–720

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pemberton J. M., Albon S. D., Guinness F. E., Clutton-Brock T. H. and Berry R. J. 1988 Genetic variation and juvenile survival in red deer.Evolution 42: 921–934

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters J. and Nash H. R. 1978 Esterases ofMus musculus: substrate and inhibition characteristics, new isozymes and homologies with man.Biochem. Genet. 16: 553–569

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Petras M. L. and Biddle F. G. 1967 Serum esterases in the house mouse,Mus musculus. Can. J. Genet. Cytol. 9: 704–710

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sage R. D. 1981 Wild mice. InThe mouse in biomedical research (eds.) L. Foster, D. Small and G. Fox (New York: Academic Press) vol. 4, pp. 39–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Said K. and Britton-Davidian J. 1991 Genetic differentiation and habitat partition of Robertsonian house mouse populations(Mus musculus domesticus) of Tunisia.J. Evol. Biol. 3: 409–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selander R. K. and Yang S. Y. 1969 Protein polymorphism and genie heterozygosity in a wild population of the house mouse (Mus musculus).Genetics 63: 653–667

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Selander R. K., Smith M. H., Yang S. Y., Johnson W. E. and Centry J. B. 1971 Biochemical polymorphism and systematics in the genusPeromyscus. I. Variation in the old field mouse (Peromyscus polionotus). Studies in Genetics, VI, University of Texas (Austin) Publications 7103: 49–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen S. and Sharma T. 1983 Role of constitutive heterochromatin in evolutionary divergence: Results of chromosome banding and condensation inhibition studies inMus musculus, Mus booduga andMus dunni. Evolution 37: 628–636

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma T. and Garg G. S. 1975 Constitutive heterochromatin and karyotype variation in Indian pygmy mouse,Mus dunni. Genet. Res. 25: 189–191

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma T., Cheong N., Sen P. and Sen S. 1986 Constitutive heterochromatin and evolutionary divergence ofMus dunni, Mus booduga andMus musculus. Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol. 127: 35–44

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Singh S. and Sharma T. 1996 Biochemical genetics of Indian pygmy field mice: Superoxide dismutase (Sod-1) as diagnostic marker inMus booduga.Biochem. Genet. 34: 437–441

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Teska W. R., Smith M. H. and Novak J. M. 1990 Food quality, heterozygosity and fitness correlates inPeromyscus polionotus.Evolution 44: 1318–1325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ValdiyaK. S. 1993 Uplift and geomorphic rejuvenation of the Himalaya in the Quaternary period.Curr. Sci. 64: 873–885

    Google Scholar 

  • Wadia D. N. 1966Geology of India, 3rd edition (revised) (London: Macmillan)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cytogenetics Laboratory, Department of Zoology, Banaras Hindu University, 221005, Varanasi, India

    S. Singh & T. Sharma

Authors
  1. S. Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. T. Sharma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. Sharma.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Singh, S., Sharma, T. High levels of genetic variation in Indian field and house mice. J. Genet. 76, 189–200 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02932217

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02932217

Keywords

Search

Navigation