| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Corresponding author: J. Gadau, Universität Würzburg-Biozentrum, Am Hubland, 97074 Würzburg, Germany., jgadau{at}biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de (E-mail)
Communicating editor: R. HARRISON
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
There is a 2.5-fold difference in male wing size between two haplodiploid insect species, Nasonia vitripennis and N. giraulti. The haploidy of males facilitated a full genomic screen for quantitative trait loci (QTL) affecting wing size and the detection of epistatic interactions. A QTL analysis of the interspecific wing-size difference revealed QTL with major effects and epistatic interactions among loci affecting the trait. We analyzed 178 hybrid males and initially found two major QTL for wing length, one for wing width, three for a normalized wing-size variable, and five for wing seta density. One QTL for wing width explains 38.1% of the phenotypic variance, and the same QTL explains 22% of the phenotypic variance in normalized wing size. This corresponds to a region previously introgressed from N. giraulti into N. vitripennis that accounts for 44% of the normalized wing-size difference between the species. Significant epistatic interactions were also found that affect wing size and density of setae on the wing. Screening for pairwise epistatic interactions between loci on different linkage groups revealed four additional loci for wing length and four loci for normalized wing size that were not detected in the original QTL analysis. We propose that the evolution of smaller wings in N. vitripennis males is primarily the result of major mutations at few genomic regions and involves epistatic interactions among some loci.
AN important question in evolutionary biology is whether adaptation involves the accumulation of many genetic changes with small phenotypic effects or, at least initially, few genes with large phenotypic effects (macromutations sensu ![]()
Most interspecific studies of the genetic basis of quantitative traits have been performed on Drosophila hybrids and demonstrated a polygenic basis of these characters (reviewed in ![]()
![]()
![]()
With the advent of complete genomic maps and new statistical methods for mapping quantitative trait loci (QTL), we can now estimate the minimum number of "genetic factors" (![]()
![]()
![]()
Epistasis is here defined as a nonadditive phenotypic effect of interacting genes. Although the role of epistasis in evolutionary and quantitative genetics has been of great theoretical interest, little is known about the relative importance of epistasis during speciation (e.g., ![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
The Nasonia species complex consists of three closely related species: N. vitripennis, N. giraulti, and N. lonigicornis (![]()
![]()
0.8 millon years (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
40% the size of male wings in N. giraulti.
![]()
The objective of this study was to conduct a QTL analysis of wing-size differences in N. vitripennis x N. giraulti hybrid males, using a linkage map based on 91 randomly amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers (![]()
![]()
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
Nasonia stocks and mapping population:
Two inbred and endosymbiont (Wolbachia) free strains of N. vitripennis (ASYMC) and N. giraulti (R16A) were used to generate 15 genetically identical hybrid F1 females. These females produced 178 males that were used for constructing a genomic map and for QTL analysis (see ![]()
![]()
![]()
Measurements and transformations:
Measurements were done on the forewings as described in ![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Wing setae in Nasonia are small, slender hairs evenly distributed over the whole area of the forewing and are probably homologous to the setae of D. melanogaster described as bristles by ![]()
![]()
![]()
|
|
Linkage analysis:
The mapping population and linkage map used for the QTL analysis were the same as in ![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
QTL analysis:
MapQTL 4.0 (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
= 0.05) for our map was LOD = 1.9 (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Epistat (![]()
![]()
Mapping procedure of conditional QTL:
First an automated search option was used to find all conditional QTL for all traits exceeding a predetermined threshold [the default settings of the program were used: i.e., 5.0 log-likelihood ratio (LLR) of an additive model vs. a nonadditive model for the null threshold and 6.0 LLR for the additive threshold; minimal group size was 10 (![]()
![]()
![]()
| RESULTS |
|---|
Morphometrics of wing- and head-size measurements:
A comparison between the wing-size measurements of males from both parental strains (ASYMC and R16A; Fig 1) and F2 hybrid males showed that the average values of the F2 males were intermediate between the two parental phenotypes (Table 1). The phenotypic correlations between the different traits in the 178 F2 males are given in Table 2. Surprisingly the phenotypic correlations between the different wing traits were rather low (Table 2), which could indicate that these traits are determined by different sets of genes. The nonsignificant correlation coefficient (0.03) of head size and normalized wing multiple indicates that we effectively removed the influence of body size on wing size by using normalized wing multiple.
|
QTL mapping:
Significant QTL (genome-wide type I error P < 0.01; Table 3) were detected for each of the four wing trait measurements: wing length (two), wing width (one), normalized wing multiple (three), and seta density (five). Additionally, we detected epistatic interactions for all traits except wing width (Table 4). All epistatic interactions were conditional. Conditional QTL have no significant effect individually but show a significant phenotypic effect if a particular allele is present at a second unlinked locus. Hence, the effect of a "conditional QTL" is conditional on the genetic background of an individual.
|
|
Contrary to expectations based on the phenotype of the parental species, we found some QTL in which the vitripennis allele was associated with the larger wing phenotype (Table 3, footnote a). Similar results (the "high" allele comes from the "low" line) have been found repeatedly in QTL mapping studies (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Wing-size QTL:
Overall, the initial QTL search for the three wing traits (wing width, wing length, and normalized wing multiple) revealed a few genomic regions (QTL) of large effect. The LOD scores for these QTL are typically well above the 0.01 genome-wide acceptance threshold. Furthermore, permutation tests indicate that we could detect QTL with effects of phenotypic variance of 46%. For example, our threshold value for detection of wing width QTL is LOD 2.3 (Table 3) and allows detection of a QTL explaining as little as 5.5% of the phenotypic variance. However, only one QTL was detected, which had a LOD score of 17.63 (38% of phenotypic variance explained). Therefore, we can confidently say that there is a region of very large effect on wing width and no evidence of intermediate magnitude QTL for this trait.
A QTL search for wing length revealed two QTL (LOD scores 3.98 and 5.56, respectively) whereas QTL with LOD scores as low as 3.4 could be detected with P < 0.01 probability. One of these two QTL, occurring on LG II, apparently involves transgressive alleles; the vitripennis allele has a wing length significantly greater than that of the giraulti allele. Two QTL on LG III and IV explained 13.5 and 11.8% of the phenotypic variance of wing length, respectively, in our mapping population. The QTL for wing length on LG IV explained 38.1% of the phenotypic variance for wing width and 22% of the phenotypic variance of normalized wing multiple (Table 3). As seen in Fig 2 and Table 3, there also appears to be a three-way epistatic interaction affecting wing length among regions on LG II (marker 407-1.01), LG IV (tightly linked markers 323-0.98 and A20-1.5), and LG V (marker P4-1.46). The two markers on LG IV map very closely to the major wing length QTL (all markers map within a 2.9-cM region; 1 cM = 0.41 Mb) and therefore possibly represent the same locus or tightly linked loci.
|
The normalized wing multiple was used to measure overall wing size normalized for body size. For this trait, one QTL of large effect was found on LG IV (LOD 11.39, 22.0% phenotypic variance explained, see also Fig 3) and two QTL of smaller effect (LOD 4.00 and 3.32) were found on LG I and LG III, closer to the detection threshold (P < 0.01, LOD 3.2). The QTL for normalized wing multiple on LG IV corresponds to the region of large effect linked to the visible marker or123, described by ![]()
![]()
|
A QTL for normalized wing multiple on LG III appears to be transgressive. That is, males with the giraulti allele actually have wings significantly smaller than those of males with the vitripennis allele. This involves the same marker showing a transgressive effect for wing length, which may explain the effect. The QTL for normalized wing multiple on LG I and III explain 7 and 5.4%, respectively, of the observed phenotypic variance. Interestingly, the region on linkage group I that explained 7% of the observed variance of normalized wing multiple had no effect on wing length or wing width. Furthermore, the region on LG III that influenced wing length had no effect on wing width or normalized wing multiple.
Using the program Epistat (![]()
Two significant epistatic interactions were detected for normalized wing multiple. One involves regions on LG V and LG IV (Table 4). The LG V region shows a much larger wing size for its giraulti allele in combination with the giraulti allele on LG IV, but a weak effect on wing size when the LG IV region has the vitripennis allele. The conditional nature of these QTL may explain the failure to detect their effect in the original primary QTL analysis (see DISCUSSION for details). The LG IV marker (A20-1.5) maps 24.1 cM from the major QTL on LG IV, and it is possible that it is the same locus given the uncertainties involved in map locations of QTL. To investigate this possibility, we determined the nonadditive interaction between the major QTL on LG IV (76-1.03f) and the LG V marker; no significant epistatic interactions were found between these two loci (LLR = 0.58, P >> 0.05). Therefore, we conclude that these represent two different loci on LG IV: one that interacts epistatically with a locus on LG V and one that has an effect on its own.
The epistatic interactions between regions on LG I (76-0.42) and LG IV (76-1.29) also probably represent two new wing-size loci. The marker on LG IV is >50 cM from the major QTL on this linkage group, and the major QTL on LG I does not show a significant epistatic interaction with the major QTL on LG IV (LLR 4.26, LLR > 6.0 statistical threshold). This epistatic interaction appears to be synergistic: The giraulti allele at each locus increases wing size, but giraulti alleles at both loci have a markedly larger effect on wing size. It is possible that the locus on LG IV (A20-1.5) involved in this interaction is the same as that involved in the interaction between LG IV and LG V: a three-way epistasis. However, these two regions are >50 cM apart, arguing against this interpretation. Taken together, the data suggest six to seven loci affecting wing size, with one region of large effect (22% of explained phenotypic variance) and two additional sets of epistatically interacting loci.
We also conducted QTL analyses for the wing width/wing length (ww/wl) ratio and normalized wing width and wing length (each divided by interocular distance). These analyses gave fundamentally the same results. QTL for ww/wl ratio were found on LG IV and LG III, mapping near the QTL for normalized wing size. Normalized wing width and normalized wing length yielded the same QTL as for the unnormalized trait. Therefore, the location of wing-size QTL is insensitive to various normalization procedures.
Seta density:
The density of setae on the wing is strongly correlated with the wing cell size in Drosophila and presumably also for Nasonia. Seta density also increases with the measurements of body size in Nasonia, indicating that larger males have larger wing cells. We, therefore, investigated QTL for seta density in hybrid males. We found significant QTL for seta density on all five LGs (Table 3) and detected three epistatic QTL (Table 4; Fig 2). In each case, the giraulti allele significantly decreases seta density (i.e., increases wing cell size) relative to the vitripennis allele. Highly significant QTL were found on LG IV (LOD 11.38, 14.8% explained phenotypic variance) and LG III (LOD 17.61, explaining 22.2% of the phenotypic variance). The major QTL on LG IV is the same marker identified for the major QTL of normalized wing size and is tightly linked to the QTL marker for wing width (Table 3; Fig 3). The LG III major QTL (22.2% of phenotypic variance) maps 19.2 cM from the transgressive QTL for wing length and normalized wing multiple. However, the seta density QTL is not transgressive but rather the giraulti allele is associated with a large reduction in seta density (presumed increase in cell size). It is perplexing why a QTL that has such a large effect on seta density (and therefore presumably on wing cell size) would not have any effect on wing size. Possible explanations for this observation are discussed later.
Three significant epistatic interactions were detected (Table 4; Fig 2). In each case, a double dose of vitripennis alleles greatly increases seta density. Two interactions involved a marker on LG IV (209-1.05) that is 21.0 cM from the major primary QTL for seta density on the same linkage group. The region on LG IV (209-1.05) interacts with the regions on LG V and LG I. The marker (209-1.05) is only 4.1 cM from the epistatic QTL for wing multiple on LG IV (A20-1.05) that interacts epistatically with a region on LG V. Furthermore, the respective markers on LG V (307-0.77 and P4-1.46) are only 15.0 cM apart, and the epistatic interactions for seta density and wing multiple are both in the same directions. Therefore, the most likely explanation is that these conditional QTL for seta density and wing multiple represent the same QTL and these QTL interact epistatically to affect wing size through their effects on wing cell size. The second seta density epistatic interaction also involves the same marker on LG IV and a region on LG I. Thus, there is likely a three-way interaction affecting seta density (Fig 2). Although wing multiple also shows a LG IV-LG I epistatic interaction, the respective markers on LG IV are unlinked, as are those on LG I, arguing against involvement of the same loci. Finally, there is a third epistatic interaction for seta density, between a LG V region (315-0.53) and a LG I region (N16-0.8). The two LG V regions are unlinked as are the LG I regions, indicating different loci. In summary, the analysis of seta number reveals a region of very large effect plus a complex web of epistatic interactions; some loci also affect wing size.
Interocular distance:
Head width was measured as the distance between the eyes at the ocellar region of the head, which was used as an index of body size for normalization of the wing multiple. We therefore investigated QTL involved in interocular distance. Four LGs contained significant QTL, each of which explained between 6.2 and 10.6% of the phenotypic variance among the hybrid males (Table 2). Three of these four QTL showed the effect where the allele of N. vitripennis was associated with the larger head size. We could also detect two epistatic interactions for interocular distance (results not shown).
These results may reveal alleles assorting for head shape or possible alleles affecting overall body size among the hybrid males. A subset of hybrid males was smaller than typical for the rearing conditions, indicating that negative epistatic interactions in some hybrid males could contribute to reduced body size. Consistent with this interpretation, one epistatic interaction showed significantly smaller head size for the two recombinant genotypes (vitripennis-giraulti and giraulti-vitripennis) and the other showed a significantly smaller head size for one recombinant genotype (vitripennis-giraulti). However, because there is no correlation between head width and wing multiple (Table 1), such effects are unlikely to confound the identification of the wing-size QTL.
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
All QTL reported here were highly significant and exceeded the 0.01% genome-wide statistical threshold determined with two different methods: (1) a standard permutation test for interval mapping (![]()
![]()
0.10.2 LOD units).
The analyses of the genetic basis of seta density, wing shape, and wing size in D. melanogaster have a long history (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
In contrast to that finding, ![]()
![]()
![]()
The epistatic analysis also helped us to explain a conflicting result with the ![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Studies from a variety of plants and animals show that experimental manipulations of cell size result in a compensatory change in cell number (and vice versa), maintaining overall size of the tissue (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
One mechanism of wing-size reduction in N. vitripennis seems to be a reduction in wing cell size because seta density in N. vitripennis is
2.9 times higher than that in N. giraulti and wing area of N. giraulti is
2.5 times larger than that of N. vitripennis. Therefore, our data suggest that the major QTL affecting male wing size act primarily by regulating wing cell size. Furthermore, several of our QTL appear to affect both wing size and seta density. However, we did map a QTL on LG III with large effect (LOD 17.61, 22% explained phenotypic variance) on seta density (the vitripennis allele has much higher seta densities than the giraulti allele) that did not show a corresponding QTL for wing width. Furthermore, a relatively weaker QTL on LG III for wing length and normalized wing multiple (Table 3) actually has the opposite effect expected on the basis of seta densitythe vitripennis alleles increase wing size. Given the large effect of the seta QTL on LG III, an explanation is needed. One explanation, that seta density is simply a correlate of body size, is not supported by the correlation analysis (Table 2). A second possibility is pseudolinkage. LG III shows a general bias toward recovery of vitripennis alleles, and two sets of recessive hybrid lethal interactions occur on this linkage group (![]()
A third possibility is that this is a locus affecting seta density independent of wing size. Most of the QTL for seta density are probably best interpreted as QTL influencing cell growth in wings. Therefore, the genes underlying these QTL may be of interest as regulators of cell size. Likely candidate genes are those involved in the insulin-dependent pathway (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Our results demonstrate that epistasis occurs between QTL for nearly all analyzed traits (Table 4). One would expect epistasis to be quite common due to the ubiquity of gene interactions at the molecular level, e.g., pleiotropic gene action, gene regulatory pathways, and signal transduction pathways. However, surprisingly few significant epistatic interactions were found in other insect QTL studies (e.g., ![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
What is the adaptive significance of the male wing-size differences between the Nasonia species? One (N. vitripennis) of the three species in the genus Nasonia has lost its ability to fly due to a significant reduction of wing size (J. GADAU, unpublished data). We assume that the evolution of smaller wings in N. vitripennis was an active selection process rather than a process of accumulating loss-of-function mutations in an unused structure for several reasons. First, reduction in wing size in Nasonia is male specific. Therefore, one would have to argue that mutational degeneration in wing size in N. vitripennis involved only wing-size genes that were expressed in a sex-specific fashion, which seems unlikely. Second, wing size in Nasonia males can affect several aspects of fitness. Wing-size-dependent vibrations and movements play a role in the male courtship behavior (![]()
![]()
We believe that smaller wings and the associated loss of flight in N. vitripennis have evolved as a reaction to an increase in local male-male competition in this species. Evidence suggests that N. vitripennis experiences more male competition than does N. giraulti (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
As mentioned, a complication of this QTL analysis is the cosegregation of recessive hybrid lethal loci in our mapping population. Approximately 50% of F2 haploid males in our cross die before adulthood (![]()
![]()
![]()
We view this QTL study as a starting point for a more detailed genetic dissection of wing size in Nasonia. Taking advantage of the haploid genetics and short generation time of this organism, we are now introgressing the different wing-size loci from N. giraulti into N. vitripennis, for fine-scale mapping and a more complete genetic analysis of wing-size evolution. Our long-term goal is positional cloning of the major wing-size genes in this system to investigate how divergent selection for a naturally evolving morphological trait acts at the molecular genetic level.
The genetic basis of the difference in wing size between the two Nasonia species, N. vitripennis and N. giraulti, seems to be few genes each with large effect. The demonstration of epistatically interacting QTL for all but one of our traits demonstrated that epistasis is a significant factor in the determination of wing size in N. vitripennis. However, the difference in wing size between N. vitripennis and N. giraulti is not determined simply by a few genes with large effects. Instead, a more realistic model might be that the evolution of smaller wings in N. vitripennis involved multiple genes with large phenotypic effects (defined as explaining >10% of the phenotypic variance), some with minor effects, so that we could not even detect them, and a significant proportion of nonadditive interactions within the genome.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We acknowledge Nida Meednu for useful comments during the development of this article. Assistance was provided by Helene Chan, Celina Kennedy, Seth Bordenstein, Berend-Jan Velthuis, Patrick O'Hara, and Jon Chen. J.H.W. and R.E.P. thank the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation Senior Scientist Awards, which led to the collaborations resulting in this work. The National Science Foundation is thanked for research support to J.H.W. (DEB-9981634) and R.E.P. J.G. thanks the Humboldt Foundation for a Feodor-Lynen Stipendium. Additional financial support for this project was provided for J.G. by the Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft SFB 554 (TP B-1 and GA-661). R.E.P. and J.G. acknowledge the Santa Fe Institute (SFI) for providing the opportunity to discuss these issues in a working group of the SFI.
Manuscript received June 5, 2001; Accepted for publication March 6, 2002.
| LITERATURE CITED |
|---|
BORDENSTEIN, S. R., F. P. O'HARA, and J. H. WERREN, 2001 Wolbachia-induced incompatibility precedes other hybrid incompatibilities in Nasonia.. Nature 409:707-710[Medline].
BREEUWER, J. A. J. and J. H. WERREN, 1990 Microorganism associated with chromosome destruction and reproductive destruction and reproductive isolation between two insect species. Nature 376:762-765.
BREEUWER, J. A. J. and J. H. WERREN, 1995 Hybrid breakdown between two haplodiploid species: the role of nuclear and cytoplasmic genes. Evolution 49:705-717.
CAMPBELL, B. C., J. D. STEFFEN-CAMPBELL, and J. H. WERREN, 1993 Phylogeny of the Nasonia species complex (Hymenoptera, Pteromalidae) inferred from an internal transcribed spacer (ITS2) and 28S rDNA sequences. Insect Mol. Biol. 2:225-237[Medline].
CHASE, K., F. R. ADLER, and K. G. LARK, 1997 Epistat: a computer program for identifying and testing interactions between pairs of quantitative trait loci. Theor. Appl. Genet. 94:724-730.
CHEVERUD, J. M. and E. J. ROUTMAN, 1995 Epistasis and its contribution to genetic variance components. Genetics 139:1455-1461[Abstract].
CHURCHILL, G. A. and R. W. DOERGE, 1994 Empirical threshold values for quantitative trait mapping. Genetics 138:963-971[Abstract].
CLARKE, G. M., 1997 The genetics and molecular basis of developmental stability: the Lucilia story. Trends Ecol. Evol. 12:89-91.
COELHO, C. M. and S. J. LEEVERS, 2000 Do growth and cell division rates determine cell size in multicellular organisms? J. Cell Sci. 113:2927-2934[Abstract].
COYNE, J. A. and H. A. ORR, 1998 The evolutionary genetics of speciation. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 353:287-305[Medline].
COYNE, J. E., N. H. BARTON, and M. TURELLI, 2000 Is Wright's shifting balance process important in evolution? Evolution 54:306-317[Medline].
CRNOKRAK, P. and D. A. ROFF, 1995 Fitness differences associated with the calling behaviour in the two wing morphs of male sand crickets, Gryllus firmus.. Anim. Behav. 50:1475-1481.
DARLING, D. C. and J. H. WERREN, 1990 Biosystematics of Nasonia (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae): two new species reared from bird's nests in North America. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 83:352-370.
DAY, S. J. and P. A. LAWRENCE, 2000 Measuring dimensions: the regulation of size and shape. Development 127:2977-2987[Abstract].
DOBZHANSKY, T., 1929 The influence of the quantity and quality of chromosomal material on the size of the cells in Drosophila melanogaster.. Arch. Entwicklungsmech. Org. 115:363-379.
DRAPEAU, M. and J. H. WERREN, 1999 Differences in mating behavior and sex ratio between three sibling species of Nasonia.. Evol. Ecol. Res. 1:223-234.
FAIRBAIRN, D. J. and R. PREZIOSI, 1996 Sexual selection and the evolution of sexual dimorphism in the waterstrider, Aquarius remigis.. Evolution 50:1501-1511.
FLYBASE,, 1999 The FlyBase database of the Drosophila genome projects and community literature. Nucleic Acids Res. 27, available from http://flybase.bio.indiana.edu/.
FRISTROM, D., and J. W. FRISTROM, 1993 The metamorphic development of the adult epidermis, pp. 843897 in The Development of Drosophila melanogaster, Vol. 2, edited by M. BATE and A. M. ARIAS. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Plainview, NY.
FRY, J. D., K. A. DERONDE, and T. F. C. MACKAY, 1995 Polygenic mutation in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetic analysis of selection lines. Genetics 139:1293-1307[Abstract].
GADAU, J., R. E. PAGE, JR., and J. H. WERREN, 1999 Mapping of hybrid incompatibility loci in Nasonia. Genetics 153:1731-1741
GOODNIGHT, C. J. and M. J. WADE, 2000 The ongoing synthesis: a reply to Coyne, Barton, and Turelli. Evolution 54:317-324[Medline].
HUNT, G. J., R. E. PAGE, JR., M. K. FONDRK, and C. J. DULLUM, 1995 Major quantitative trait loci affecting honey bee foraging behavior. Genetics 141:1537-1545[Abstract].
JANSEN, R. C., 1993 Interval mapping of multiple quantitative trait loci. Genetics 135:205-211[Abstract].
JANSEN, R. C., 1994 Controlling the type I and type II errors in mapping quantitative trait loci. Genetics 136:871-881.
JANSEN, R. C. and P. STAM, 1994 High resolution of quantitative traits into multiple loci via interval mapping. Genetics 136:1447-1455[Abstract].
KLIMAN, R. M. and J. HEY, 1993 DNA sequence variation at the period locus within and among species of the Drosophila melanogaster complex. Genetics 133:375-387[Abstract].
LARK, K. G., K. CHASE, F. ADLER, L. M. MANSUR, and J. H. ORF, 1995 Interactions between quantitative trait loci in soybean in which trait variation at one locus is conditional upon a specific allele at another. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 92:4656-4660
LAURIE, C. C., J. R. TRUE, L. JIANJUN, and J. M. MERCER, 1997 An introgression analysis of quantitative trait loci that contribute to a morphological difference between Drosophila simulans and D. mauritiana.. Genetics 148:339-348.
LONG, A. D., S. L. MULLANEY, J. D. REID, C. H. FRY, and J. LANGLEY et al., 1995 High resolution mapping of genetic factors affecting abdominal setae number in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 139:1273-1291[Abstract].
MACDONALD, S. J. and D. B. GOLDSTEIN, 1999 A quantitative genetic analysis of male sexual traits distinguishing the sibling species Drosophila simulans and D. sechellia.. Genetics 152:1683-1699.
MACKAY, T. F. C., 1996 The nature of quantitative genetic variation revisited: lessons from Drosophila setae. BioEssays 18:113-121[Medline].
MILKMAN, R., 1970 The genetic basis of natural variation in Drosophila melanogaster. Adv. Genet. 55:100-114.
ORR, H. A. and J. A. COYNE, 1992 The genetics of adaptation: a reassessment. Am. Nat. 140:725-742.
PAGE, R. E., JR., M. K. FONDRK, G. J. HUNT, E. GUZMAN-NOVOA, and M. A. HUMPHRIES et al., 2001 Genetic dissection of honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) foraging behavior. J. Hered. 91:474-479
ROFF, D. A., 1997 Evolutionary Quantitative Genetics. Chapman & Hall, New York.
SAUL, G. B., 1993 Gene map of the parasitic wasp Nasonia vitripennis (= Mormoniella vitripennis) 2N = 10, pp. 32773280 in Genetic Maps, Ed. 6, edited by S. J. O'BRIEN. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY.
SKINNER, S. W., 1983 Extra chromosomal sex ratio factors in the parasitoid wasp Nasonia (= Mormoniella) vitripennis. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
TANKSLEY, S. D., 1993 Mapping polygenes. Annu. Rev. Genet. 27:205-233[Medline].
VAN DEN ASSEM, J. and J. H. WERREN, 1994 A comparison of the courtship and mating behavior of three species of Nasonia (Hymenoptera, Pteromalidae). Insect. Mol. Biol. 2:225-237.
VAN OOIJEN, J., 1999 LOD significance thresholds for QTL analysis in experimental populations of diploid species. Heredity 83:613-624.
VAN OOIJEN, J., M. P. BOER, R. C. JANSEN and C. MALIEPAARD, 1999 MapQTL (tm) Version 4.0: Software for the Calculation of QTL Positions on Genetic Maps. CPRO-DLO, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
VIA, S., and D. J. HAWTHORNE, 1998 The genetics of speciation, pp. 352364 in Endless Form, edited by D. J. HOWARD and S. H. BERLOCHER. Oxford University Press, London.
WEBER, K., R. EISMAN, L. MOREY, A. PATTY, and J. SPARKS et al., 1999 An analysis of polygenes affecting wing shape on chromosome 3 in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 153:773-786
WEBER, K. E., R. EISMAN, S. HIGGINS, L. MOREY, and A. PATTY et al., 2001 An analysis of polygenes affecting wing shape on chromosome 2 in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 159:1045-1057
WEINKOVE, D., T. P. NEUFELD, T. TWARDZIK, M. D. WATERFIELD, and S. J. LEEVERS, 1999 Regulation of imaginal disc cell size, cell number and organ size by Drosophila class IA phosphoinositide 3-kinase and its adaptor. Curr. Biol. 9:1019-1029[Medline].
WESTON, R. F., I. QURESHI, and J. H. WERREN, 1999 Genetics of a wing size difference between two Nasonia species. J. Evol. Biol. 12:586-595.
WOLF, L. L., W. T. STARMER, M. POLAK, and J. S. F. BARKER, 2000 Genetic architecture of a wing size measure in Drosophila hibisci from two populations in eastern Australia. Heredity 85:521-529[Medline].
WRIGHT, S., 1968 Evolution and the Genetics of Population, Vol. 1: Genetic and Biometric Foundations. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
YU, S. B., J. X. LI, C. G. XU, Y. F. TAN, and Y. J. GAO et al., 1997 Importance of epistasis as the genetic basis of heterosis in an elite rice hybrid. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94:9226-9231
ZENG, Z., 1993 Theoretical basis for separation of multiple linked gene effects in mapping quantitative trait loci. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 90:10972-10976
ZENG, Z., 1994 Precision mapping of quantitative trait loci. Genetics 136:1457-1468[Abstract].
ZIMMERMAN, E., A. PALSSON, and G. GIBSON, 2000 Quantitative trait loci affecting components of wing shape in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 155:671-683
ZWAAN, B. J., B. R. A. RICARDO, C. J. AVIS, J. VAN LAND, and L. PARTRIDGE, 2000 Cellular basis of wing size variation in Drosophila melanogaster: a comparison of latitudinal clines on two continents. Heredity 84:338-347.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
O. Niehuis, A. K. Judson, and J. Gadau Cytonuclear Genic Incompatibilities Cause Increased Mortality in Male F2 Hybrids of Nasonia giraulti and N. vitripennis Genetics, January 1, 2008; 178(1): 413 - 426. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
V. Orgogozo, K. W. Broman, and D. L. Stern High-Resolution Quantitative Trait Locus Mapping Reveals Sign Epistasis Controlling Ovariole Number Between Two Drosophila Species Genetics, May 1, 2006; 173(1): 197 - 205. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||