The population ecology of house mice (<i>Mus domesticus</i>) on the Isle of May, Scotland

Triggs, G. S.

doi:10.1111/j.1469-7998.1991.tb03828.x

Cited by 32 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Seventy‐seven mice carrying three pairs of Robertsonian fusions (2 n = 34), 14 informative alleles and a dilute coat colour variant were released. The introduced mice crossed readily with the native population and the alleles, translocations and Y‐chromosome of the introduced mice spread rapidly to around 50% of the introduced frequencies within six generations, achieving near genetic homogeneity despite the normal division of the population into discrete demes (Berry, 1986b; Triggs, 1991; Scriven, 1992). Maternally inherited mtDNA spread at around one third of the rate of the other markers (Jones et al ., 1995).…”

Section: Adaptation and Opportunismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In cold conditions, mice venture less from their nests, reducing their opportunities for obtaining food and leading to a suppression of breeding (Bronson, 1979, 1984a). They show both daily and seasonal torpor, often associated with huddling behaviour (Jakobson, 1981; Triggs, 1991). These constraints are not fixed: mice breed on sub‐Antarctic islands at temperatures which would inhibit reproduction in temperate climes (Berry, Peters & Van Aarde, 1978).…”

Section: Adaptation and Opportunismmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The house mouse: a model and motor for evolutionary understanding

Berry

Scriven

2005

Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Commensal house mice have spread from their probable origin in north India, differentiating into a number of forms described variously as species, semispecies or subspecies. The different taxa can breed together and exchange genes but they retain their distinctiveness (although Mus ( musculus ) molossinus of Japan seems to be the result of a complete fusion between M. ( m .) musculus and M. ( m .) castaneus ). The most widespread form is M. ( m. ) domesticus , which has successfully colonized every continent as a commensal, albeit with varying contributions from other Mus genomes. It has also been domesticated as the laboratory mouse. This means that the same genome is exposed to a wide variety of environments and gives tremendous opportunities for exploring the operation of different evolutionary mechanisms. Mice have accompanied evolutionary understanding from early Darwinian days -confirming Mendelian ratios and showing they applied in mammals, providing data on rates of evolution, and representing examples of dominance modification, differential survival, competition and other indicators of a struggle for existence. However, they have an unfulfilled potential to drive as well as to illuminate evolutionary theory -by revealing more about, for example, the interactions between gene flow and social determinants, constraints on introgression and physiological adjustments. This potential can be explored through our ever-deepening knowledge of the genome and molecular mechanisms, and by the application of new techniques, but its most effective agent will always be the cross-disciplinary synergy of visionary scientists like Julian Huxley, Charles Elton and Louis Thaler.

show abstract

Section: Adaptation and Opportunismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Adaptation and Opportunismmentioning

confidence: 99%

The house mouse: a model and motor for evolutionary understanding

Berry

Scriven

2005

Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Transmission distortion (d) of male heterozygotes was kept fixed at 0.95 in all simulations (except when PPE was considered), because this is the value used in most of the earlier simulations (see table 1). Given our assumption that each cycle represents about 10 wk, this value is equivalent to an adult mortality rate of0.16 per month and reflects field estimates which are in the range 0.15-0.20 per month (Berry 1968;Stickel 1979;Pennycuik et al 1986;Triggs 1991). First, mean litter size (B) was fixed at 6, which is roughly the mean of field estimates (Laurie 1946;Pelikan 1981;Sage 1981).…”

Section: -Imentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Deme Size, Reproductive Patterns, and Dispersal in the Dynamics of t-Lethal Haplotypes

Nunney¹,

Baker²

1993

Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The t-lethal haplotypes (t) found in house mouse (Mus musculus) populations are recessive lethals favored by gametic selection whereby male heterozygotes exhibit a non-Mendelian transmission ratio of about 95% t. The expected equilibrium frequency is 0.385; however, empirical values are lower, averaging close to 0.13. We examined the hypothesis that interdemic selection is the cause of the low empirical values by using a deme-structured simulation model that included overlapping generations, a realistic breeding system, differential deme productivity, and a large total population. We found that under some conditions interdemic selection could lower t frequency below 0.13 in the face of immigration rates up to 5%. Low frequencies were correlated with effective deme size (n ), regardless of whether n was changed through changing deme size (n) or through changing the proportion of breeding adults. Earlier workers showed how the first two phases of interdemic selection (random genetic differentiation and mass selection) interacted to reduce the haplotype frequency, but here we show the importance of the third phase (differential productivity of demes) once demes are linked by dispersal. The effect of this phase is not due to the (negative) covariation between deme productivity and haplotype frequency, but occurs when differential deme productivity generates a difference in t frequency between the population of juveniles recruited into their natal deme and the population of juvenile dispersers. This difference was maximized when the average productivity of demes was low, either because few adult females bred at any one time and/or because fecundity was low. Contrary to an earlier prediction, male-biased dispersal also reduced haplotype frequency, and this probably stems from the relative excess of wild-type genotypes among dispersers compared to the deme residents. Another unexpected finding was that the randomly generated excess of heterozygotes (F < 0) found in small demes favored t haplotypes; however, the effect was only seen when the more powerful influence of the third phase of interdemic selection was removed. Simulations of neutral polymorphisms showed that a deme structure giving F ≤ 0.6 is inconsistent with a haplotype frequency below 0.13. Based on current empirical estimates of F (about 0.2), we concluded that immigration rates in the field are too high for interdemic selection alone to cause the observed deficit of lethal haplotypes. One factor that could combine with population structure effects is the observation that the transmission ratio is lowered to around 0.6 in litters produced from postpartum estrus (PPE). Incorporating this factor, we showed that interdemic selection could be effective in lowering the frequency of t below 0.13 when F was above 0.43 even when migration rates were up to 10%. These results suggest that if empirical haplotype and F estimates are accurate, then additional factors such as a lowered fitness of heterozygotes may be involved.

show abstract

“…At the lower densities typical of feral populations (often fewer than 150 mice per ha), house mice appear less territorial, although some individuals (nursing females in particular) can become site‐attached (Fitzgerald, Karl & Moller, 1981). In these situations loose groups are formed with individuals having overlapping home ranges (Triggs, 1991) or exclusive territories that are defended against members of the same sex (Berry & Jakobson, 1974; Fitzgerald et al ., 1981).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dispersal in house mice

Pocock¹,

Hauffe²,

Searle³

2005

Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

151

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review evaluates direct (live-trapping) and indirect (genetic) methods to study dispersal in wild house mice ( Mus musculus ) and summarizes field and experimental data to examine the causes and consequences of dispersal. Commensal house mice (associated with human habitations, farms, food stores and other anthropogenic habitats) typically show lower rates of dispersal than feral house mice (living in crops, natural and semi-natural habitats). However, early claims of long-term fine-scale genetic structure in commensal house mice (due to low rates of dispersal) are not supported by recent data. Dispersal becomes obligatory when habitat conditions deteriorate, but most dispersal occurs below the local environmental carrying capacity and is due to social interactions with conspecifics. Excursions are relatively frequent and probably allow mice to assess the quality of habitats before dispersing. Young males have the greatest tendency to disperse, apparently prompted mainly by aggressive interactions with dominant males. If they do disperse, females integrate into new groups more easily than do males. Dispersing house mice risk loss of condition or death, but may gain reproductive opportunities on arrival in a new location. House mice can be transported passively as stowaways with humans; this contributes to population persistence and genetic structure at regional scales and has allowed house mice to spread world-wide.

show abstract

The population ecology of house mice (Mus domesticus) on the Isle of May, Scotland

Cited by 32 publications

References 42 publications

The house mouse: a model and motor for evolutionary understanding

The house mouse: a model and motor for evolutionary understanding

The Role of Deme Size, Reproductive Patterns, and Dispersal in the Dynamics of t-Lethal Haplotypes

Dispersal in house mice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About