The missing E: the role of the environment in evolution and animal breeding

Abstract

Summary In the development of applied quantitative genetics to date it was assumed that natural selection was absent. Hence, an important part of the environment has been ignored and breeders have concentrated on estimated breeding values. The same is implicit in molecular efforts to modify genotypes of animals directly. Furthermore, explanations of evolution imply that genes are responsible for evolutionary changes. These consequences of this assumption are now seen to be wrong. Beilharz (1998b) shows that the resources available in any environment limit the phenotypes that can develop there. This is because natural selection is always acting on phenotypes and has already selected organisms to be as good as it is possible to be on the available resources. This paper describes the necessary theoretical changes to quantitative genetics and the consequences that follow for evolutionary theory and animal breeding. A component of environment (Er, regional environment) describing that environmental variation to which natural selection adapts populations of organisms, is introduced. Variation among levels of Er reflects different amounts of resources available for animals to live on. At each level of Er genotypes are selected that have maximum phenotypic fitness exactly at that level, at the expense of genotypes with either lower fitness or a fitness demanding higher levels of resources to realise its potential. Changing environments (levels of resources) favour new phenotypes whose resource demand matches the changed resources available. The role of genes is to produce those variants that have phenotypes able to follow the environmental change. The paper also shows how genotype–environment interactions have resulted from the matching of genotypes to different levels of Er in earlier times. In the breeding of domestic animals, genetic improvement of production traits, without raising Er, must be accompanied by trade‐offs (antagonisms) among production traits and with fitness. To obtain improvement with minimal negative side effects, breeding goals must be specified more comprehensively that to date, e.g. by also taking into account the duration of productive life. The selection criteria and estimates of heritability and genetic correlations used in the estimation of breeding values must be appropriate for the particular level of environment in which the genetic improvement is to be made. Zusammenfassung Das fehlende E: Die Rolle der Umwelt in Evolution und Tierzucht Die bisherige Entwicklung der quantitativen Genetik fand unter Ausklammerung der natürlichen Selektion statt. Das führte zur Vernachlässigung eines wichtigen Teils der Umwelteffekte und die Züchter konzentrierten sich auf geschätzte Zuchtwerte. Das Gleiche gilt für die Bemühungen, Genotypen durch molekulargenetische Methoden zu manipulieren. Ausserdem basieren Interpretationen der Evolution darauf, daß Gene für evolutionäre Veränderungen verantwortlich sind. Diese Konsequenzen der Auskalmmerung der natürlichen Selektion sind jetzt als falsch erkannt worden....

Effects of Resource Allocation on Behavioural Strategies: A Comparison of Red Junglefowl (Gallus gallus) and Two Domesticated Breeds of Poultry

“…A way to understand this modi®cation of behaviour in a biological± evolutionary context is oered by Beilharz (1998), Beilharz et al (1993) and Beilharz & Nitter (1998) in the so-called resource allocation theory. According to this, the ®tness of an animal is the product of many dierent components that aect the reproductive success of that animal (e.g.…”

Transition Period of the Dairy Cow Revisited: II. Homeorhetic Stimulus and Ketosis With Implication for Fertility

“…Beilharz et al (1993) approached possible genetic health risks at high MY from a theoretical point of view: resource allocation. The authors discussed some potential restrictions of fitness at continued selection for one trait at limited resources and concluded that "unless the environment (resources, the author) is being improved, antagonisms between traits will start to develop as soon as production traits are selected" (Beilharz & Nitter, 1998). An analogous conclusion has been made by Berry et al (2011): "Although there were a few exceptions, selection for increased milk production alone without cognizance of other traits is expected to increase the incidence of mastitis, lameness, cystic ovaries, ketosis and metritis".…”

“…The genetic correlations between MY and diseases (see above) and the objections of Emanuelson (1988), Beilharz et al (1993), Beilharz and Nitter (1998), Friggens and Newbold (2007), and Berry et al (2011) do not offer a causal explanation, although the study of Tsuruta et al (2017) indicates that closer genetic and possible underlying information will become available in future. MY during early lactation is correlating with NEB, and NEB clearly means limited resources and a statistical risk for health during a period of homeorhetic priority of milk secretion.…”

Optimization of Resource Allocation to the Genetic Type in Reproductive Rabbit Does

“…Perhaps, one of the most important is the concept of fitness. From a practical point of view, fitness could be defined as 'the number of progeny produced over a lifetime which survive to breed' (Beilharz, 1998). However, as recording in that way would be very time consuming, the total number of young weaned over longish period of time would be a good approximated measure of fitness (Beilharz et al, 1993).…”

“…These priorities may arise because the environment limits the amount of resources an animal can acquire and subsequently they have to split them among fitness components (Beilharz and Nitter, 1998). …”