2014
DOI: 10.1186/preaccept-8844566431425109
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impacts of genetic correlation on the independent evolution of body mass and skeletal size in mammals

Abstract: Background: Mammals show a predictable scaling relationship between limb bone size and body mass. This relationship has a genetic basis which likely evolved via natural selection, but it is unclear how much the genetic correlation between these traits in turn impacts their capacity to evolve independently. We selectively bred laboratory mice for increases in tibia length independent of body mass, to test the hypothesis that a genetic correlation with body mass constrains evolutionary change in tibia length. Re… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To test this concept, we performed haplotagging on 245 "Longshanks" mice from a 20-generation selective-breeding experiment for long tibia length (12,13). We sequenced these mice to an average depth of 0.24× and phased the data using STITCH.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To test this concept, we performed haplotagging on 245 "Longshanks" mice from a 20-generation selective-breeding experiment for long tibia length (12,13). We sequenced these mice to an average depth of 0.24× and phased the data using STITCH.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Next, we reanalyzed the Longshanks selection experiment, which selected for longer tibiae length relative to body size in mice, leading to a response to selection of about 5 standard deviations over the course of twenty generations (Castro et al 2019;Marchini et al 2014). This study includes two independent selection lines, Longshanks 1 and 2 (LS1 and LS2), and an unselected control line (Ctrl) where parents were randomly selected.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The G matrix has received much attention on the grounds that it constrains adaptation. However, artificial selection has proved successful even when deliberately applied to trait combinations that show minimal variance (see, for example, Weber et al, 1999;Hill and Kirkpatrick, 2010;Marchini et al, 2014): as long as there is some additive variance in the direction of selection, selection can change the mean. Of course, the G matrix has very high dimension, and some directions may have zero variance (that is, there may be some zero eigenvalues).…”
Section: Directional Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%