- THIS ARTICLE
-
Abstract
- Full Text (PDF)
- Alert me when this article is cited
- Alert me if a correction is posted
- SERVICES
- Similar articles in this journal
- Similar articles in PubMed
- Alert me to new issues of the journal
- Download to citation manager
- Reprints & Permissions
- CITING ARTICLES
- Citing Articles via HighWire
- Citing Articles via Google Scholar
- GOOGLE SCHOLAR
- Articles by Keightley, P. D.
- Articles by Ohnishi, O.
- Search for Related Content
- PUBMED
- PubMed Citation
- Articles by Keightley, P. D.
- Articles by Ohnishi, O.
EMS-Induced Polygenic Mutation Rates for Nine Quantitative Characters in Drosophila melanogaster
Peter D. Keightleya and Ohmi Ohnishiba Institute of Cell, Animal and Population Biology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3JT, Scotland
b Plant Germ-Plasm Institute, Faculty of Agriculture, Kyoto University, Mozume Muko, Kyoto 617, Japan
Corresponding author: Peter D. Keightley, Institute of Cell, Animal and Population Biology, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JT, Scotland, p.keightley{at}edinburgh.ac.uk (E-mail).
Communicating editor: M. J. SIMMONS
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
Polygenic mutations were induced by treating Drosophila melanogaster adult males with 2.5 mM EMS. The treated second chromosomes, along with untreated controls, were then made homozygous, and five life history, two behavioral, and two morphological traits were measured. EMS mutagenesis led to reduced performance for life history traits. Changes in means and increments in genetic variance were relatively much higher for life history than for morphological traits, implying large differences in mutational target size. Maximum likelihood was used to estimate mutation rates and parameters of distributions of mutation effects, but parameters were strongly confounded with one another. Several traits showed evidence of leptokurtic distributions of effects and mean effects smaller than a few percent of trait means. Distributions of effects for all traits were strongly asymmetrical, and most mutations were deleterious. Correlations between life history mutation effects were positive. Mutation parameters for one generation of spontaneous mutation were predicted by scaling parameter estimates from the EMS experiment, extrapolated to the whole genome. Predicted mutational coefficients of variation were in good agreement with published estimates. Predicted changes in means were up to 0.14% or 0.6% for life history traits, depending on the model of scaling assumed.
KNOWLEDGE of mutation rates and characteristics of distributions of mutation effects is fundamentally important for quantitative genetic models (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
More recently, experiments not involving balancers in which spontaneous mutations were allowed to randomly accumulate in the whole genome have been carried out with replicated inbred lines of Drosophila (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
The study of spontaneous mutations affecting quantitative traits in Drosophila melanogaster is a laborious undertaking. Thus, in the present experiment, ethyl methanesulfonate- (EMS-) induced mutations were investigated as an approximation to spontaneous mutations. EMS induces a spectrum of mutation events different from spontaneous mutations, most critically because it does not induce TE insertions, a major source of spontaneous mutation events (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Nine quantitative characters were studied: five were important fitness componentscompetitive viability, egg productivity, hatchability, development time and longevity; two were morphologicalbody length and abdominal bristle number; and two were behavioralphototaxis and mating speed of males. In this paper, increases in variance and changes of mean relative to a contemporary untreated control are compared for the nine traits. Based on maximum likelihood (ML), numbers of mutation events induced by EMS and parameters of the distributions of their effects are estimated. Finally, by using information on rates of accumulation of lethal mutations and the rate of accumulation of variability for bristle number as standards, predicted rates of changes of means and variance due to the accumulation of spontaneous mutations are obtained for all the traits measured.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
Drosophila stocks:
The wild-type stock used in the experiment, abbreviated +/1, was an inbred line from a natural population of Madison, Wisconsin. A laboratory stock abbreviated Cy/Pm In(2) SM1 al2 Cy sp2 / In(2) Pm dp b Pm ds33k, having the same inbred genetic background, was used to isolate mutagenized and control second chromosomes, and as a competitor in the viability assay.
EMS mutagenesis:
Starting from a single second chromosome of the wild-type stock, 203 Pm /1 lines were established by crossing a Cy/Pm female with a wild-type male, then crossing a Pm /1 son to Cy/Pm (Figure 1). In the next generation, two Pm /1 males were randomly picked from each line; one was used as a control and the other was treated with EMS. Young adult males were treated with 2.5 x 10-3 M EMS according to the method of ![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
|
Preadult viability:
The Cy method of ![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Fecundity:
For each chromosome line, three replicates of 10 pair matings were set up in milk bottles. The pairs came from the EMS-treated or control homozygous lines maintained in vials. From each bottle, six virgin females and six young males were collected and kept at 25° for 48 hr. These flies were mated and transferred to vials containing fresh medium after 24, 48, and 72 hr, and discarded after 96 hr. Eggs deposited during each of the four 24-hr periods were counted. The trait is expressed as the average daily productivity per female.
Hatchability:
The number of offspring emerging from the above four successive cultures in the fecundity assay was counted from day 11 after the first transfer. The trait is the total number of emerged flies divided by the total eggs deposited, expressed as a percentage. It is equivalent to the trait egg-to-adult viability assayed by FERNANDEZ and LOPEZ-FANJUL (1996) in a spontaneous mutation accumulation experiment.
Development time:
For each chromosome line, three replicates of 10 pairs of 23-day-old homozygous males and females from the milk bottle cultures mentioned in the fecundity assay were kept in a vial for one day, then transferred to a vial containing fresh medium, and allowed to deposit eggs for 3 hr to achieve good synchronization of larval development. The vials, which contained about 100 eggs, were kept at 25° under constant illumination of 30 lux. They were checked for emerged adults at 180 hr after the cross and at 3-hr intervals thereafter. The time of emergence of the first five adult flies was recorded. The trait is the time of emergence of the fifth fly in hours.
Longevity:
Three replicates of 15 virgin females and 15 males were sampled from the bottle cultures mentioned in the fecundity assay. These flies were crossed in a vial, then live flies transferred at 3-day intervals. The number of dead flies was counted every day. The mean survival time of the middle five flies of each sex, that is, the 6th to 10th longest lived flies was used as an index of longevity, expressed in days.
Mating speed of males:
For each line, there were three replicates consisting of 10 homozygous males and 12 virgin females of the original wild-type stock in two groups of 6 females and 5 males, mated in vials. Flies were 72 hr old at the start of the assay. The number of copulated pairs at 5 and 10 min after the cross was counted. The trait is the proportion of copulated pairs at 5 or 10 min after the cross.
Phototaxis:
Three replicates of 30 24-hr-old males from the milk bottle cultures mentioned in the fecundity assay were kept in the dark until the time of the experiment. These flies were put in the light-neutral central section of a three chamber phototaxis choice box with sliding gates. One side of the box was darkened by covering with a cloth, then the gates on both the light and dark sides were opened. After one minute the gates were closed and the number of flies in each section counted. The trait is the number of flies in the light zone. The intensity of illumination at the surface of the box was about 100 lux.
Body length:
Eight males and eight females were sampled from each of three replicates of 10 mated pairs of flies. The trait is the distance from the top of the head to the tip of a wing in millimeters, measured using a micrometer under a microscope.
Abdominal bristle number:
The same flies were used as in the body length assay. The trait is the number of bristles on the fourth sternite.
ML estimation of U and mutation distribution parameters:
The likelihood of data for each trait was computed independently. Likelihood evaluation was based on the method described by ![]()
![]()
2E. The variation among these lines is due to random environmental effects, and, as seen in the RESULTS, some background genetic variation. The EMS-treated lines were assumed to be subject to the same sources of variation as the controls, and to carry n independent mutations, where n was assumed to be a random variable from the Poisson distribution, p(n | U), parameter U. The effects of individual mutations, a, were assumed to be from a gamma distribution, g(a |
,ß), reflected about zero, with parameters
specifying scale, ß shape, and a parameter P specifying the proportion of the density positive [see ![]()
) to strongly leptokurtic distributions with the majority of effects close to zero and a long tail (ß
0). Mutations were assumed to act additively.
For the unreflected gamma distribution, the likelihood of an observed value Z i can be written:
![]() |
(1) |
2E) is the normal density function (
, ß are gamma distributed with parameters
, nß, so (1) simplifies to:
![]() |
(2) |
Note that (1) contains a series of terms with multidimensional integrals, which have become single integrals in (2). with a reflected gamma distribution of mutation effects, in which there are fractions P and 1 - P of mutations with effects greater and less than zero, respectively, terms in (2) need to be expanded to account for the binomial probabilities of different numbers of positive or negative effects:
Algorithm for
computation of likelihood:
In principle, it is possible to evaluate (2) or (3), which contain series of single or double integrals, by standard numerical integration procedures (e.g., ![]()
![]()
Maximization of likelihood:
The overall likelihood of the data was the product of results of evaluation of (3) with Z i values from the independent EMS-treated lines and the control lines (U was set to zero for the latter lines). For the traits with data in two sexes, Z i was the average over sexes. As with the previous version of the procedure (![]()
, ß, P, M,
2E) was maximized using the downhill simplex method (NELDER and MEAD 1965). Following the suggestion of ![]()
| RESULTS |
|---|
Effects of EMS on trait means and variance:
EMS mutagenesis led to major changes in the frequency distributions of line means for the nine quantitative traits (Figure 2). To compare the effects of EMS on the overall trait means (M), differences in overall means between EMS-treated and control lines were scaled by control means,
M/M = 100 x (MEMS - MC)/MC (Table 1). EMS mutagenesis, as expected, led to reduced performance for life history traits. In all cases,
M/M is significantly different from zero, including the behavioral and morphological traits, indicating a prevalence of directional mutation effects. Note, for example, abdominal bristle number, a trait for which stabilizing selection has been detected (![]()
![]()
|
|
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to estimate components of variance attributable to differences between lines, and, where data on two sexes were available, to sex x line interaction effects (Table 2). In the latter case, the "split plot" method was used to estimate the interaction component, with the two sexes split within each vial, and error variances between vials (error 1) and within vials (error 2) estimated [SNEDECOR and COCH-RAN (1989), Chapter 16]. Because the control lines generally showed a significant component of variance between lines, presumably due to background and accumulated spontaneous mutational variation, the genetic variances induced by EMS treatment were estimated as differences between the between line variance component estimates for the treated and control lines, Vg = Vg,EMS - Vg,C . One way to compare the different Vg estimates is by scaling by the overall mean squared, that is, by expressing as the mutational coefficient of variation = CVg = 100 x
g /M, which is appropriate for fitness-related traits (![]()
![]()
M/M estimated, with the life history traits having substantially higher values than morphological traits.
|
Estimation of sex x line interaction effects was possible for three traits, longevity, body length, and bristle number, for which measurements were made in both sexes. ANOVA by the split plot method detected significant sex x line interactions for all three traits (Table 2), but the variance components are small, less than one-tenth of the between line variance component. This result contrasts with the large sexual dimorphism effects for abdominal bristle number observed in studies of P element insertional mutagenesis (![]()
![]()
![]()
Numbers of mutations and the distributions of their effects:
To estimate mutation rates and parameters of distributions of mutation effects, data from each trait were independently analyzed by ML, under the assumptions that mutation numbers are Poisson distributed and their effects are gamma distributed (Table 3). For the viability data, lethal-bearing lines were excluded from the analysis. For all traits analyzed, the important parameters in the model are heavily confounded with one another, as illustrated in Figure 3, where likelihood for viability data is plotted as a function of U and E(a), with fixed values of ß and P. There is a ridge in the two-dimensional likelihood surface due to negative correlation between U and E(a), so an increase in mutation rate can be compensated for by a decrease in the mean effect. The three-dimensional likelihood as a function of
, ß, and U is subject to even more serious confounding effects. For example, increasing U can be compensated for by simultaneously decreasing ß (making the distribution of effects more leptokurtic), while decreasing the ratio E(a) = ß/
to keep the product U E(a) roughly constant. The confounding between the parameters explains, in part, why estimates of U, mean mutant effect and ß are usually unbounded, and has been noted previously (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
|
|
An alternative way to compare mutational target sizes is to estimate U and E(a) under the assumption that different traits have the same shaped distribution of mutation effects. The Mukai-Bateman method assumes, for example, that mutation effects are equal (i.e., ß
), in which case an estimate of U is obtained from
M 2/Vg , and an estimate of E(a) obtained from Vg /
M (![]()
![]()
|
Mutational correlations:
The experiment was not set up with the aim of measuring genetic correlations between pairs of traits, as measurements were mostly performed at different times on different samples from the lines. However, a comparison of phenotypic correlations between line means (rP) can provide some information on the overall pattern (Table 5). With the exception of development time, rP for the EMS lines are mostly positive. Phenotypic correlations involving development time are mostly negative, so would be positive for the reciprocal trait "development speed," which is positively related to fitness. Although there are rather more significant rP values than expected by chance in the controls, presumably reflecting genetic variance in these lines (see Table 2), there is no clear pattern in the sign of rP . There are many more significant rP values in the EMS lines, and some of the largest ones are associated with major components of fitness. Examples of bivariate plots for EMS-treated and control lines are shown in Figure 4. It would be desirable to produce estimates of parameters of bivariate distributions of mutation effects, including correlations between mutation effects for pairs of traits [see ![]()
![]()
|
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
Variation among traits in mutational target size:
A major motivation for this study was to compare susceptibilities of different quantitative traits to EMS mutagenesis. Scaled changes in mean (
M /M) and mutational coefficients of variance (CVg) are calculated directly from the data in a model-free manner, whereas estimates of U and mutation distribution parameters depend on the assumption of some distribution of mutation effects, and are therefore potentially model-sensitive. Both
M/M and CVg estimates range over more than one order of magnitude among traits. The two morphological traits, body length and abdominal bristle number, have by far the lowest figures, a pattern consistent with a previous comparison of spontaneous mutational variability for quantitative traits (![]()
![]()
Mutation parameter estimates are strongly confounded:
Unfortunately, a model to estimate numbers of mutation events and the distribution of their effects tends to be overparameterized, so resulting parameter estimates are often unbounded (see Table 3). Most frequently, the set of parameters which gives the best fit to the data is a very high mutation rate in combination with a very small average mutation effect, and a highly leptokurtic distribution of effects. Consequently it is only possible to use likelihood to estimate lower or upper limiting values for the mutation parameters. For several traits, however, there is strong evidence for a leptokurtic distribution of mutation effects, and for mean mutation effects of at most a few percent. Part of the problem in disentangling the parameters is that the dose of EMS generated rather a large amount of variability; each line presumably contained several mutations with appreciable effects on each trait. Significantly, body length is the only trait with support limits for U and E(a) within bounds, and this trait also had the lowest CVg estimate. Assuming that all DNA affects all traits, the number of mutation events is logically the same for each trait. If this number were known, or could be guessed, it would be possible to fit U as a fixed parameter in the model (![]()
![]()
Distributions of mutation effects are strongly asymmetrical:
This study has provided the first opportunity to compare proportions of positive and negative mutation effects for a wide range of quantitative traits. As expected, the majority of mutations affecting major fitness components and other life history traits had deleterious effects. While best estimates for proportions of beneficial mutations for life history traits were zero, the possibility of a rather large fraction of positive effects was not excluded. Presumably the much larger number of deleterious mutations hides possible effects of beneficials. To keep the number of parameters manageable, a critical assumption of the analysis was identical distributions for positive and negative effects. It is likely, however, that characteristics of the distributions of positive and negative effects differ. For example, the ratio of numbers of mutations with large to small effects may be smaller for beneficial mutations than deleterious mutations.
In the present experiment, the distribution of mutation effects for abdominal bristle number is strongly skewed downwards, and this has generally, but not always, been seen in previous experiments involving selected or unselected accumulation of mutations in initially homozygous populations. The most striking asymmetric selection responses to selection on abdominal bristle number have been seen in very large scale selection experiments with an inbred base population (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Responses to artificial selection on reproductive fitness traits from standing variation are usually higher in the downwards direction (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Consequence of among line variation in mutagen uptake:
It is usually assumed that the number of spontaneous mutation events per genome per generation is Poisson distributed. With induced mutagenesis, however, individuals may vary in their intake of mutagen or susceptibility to a given intake, so the distribution of mutation numbers may not be Poisson. For example, a subset of individuals could take up no mutagen whatsoever, while the remainder could take up a larger than average dose. This would obviously have implications for the present analysis and a previous analysis of the viability data from this experiment (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
2U), and the variance of mutation numbers among individuals is U +
2U. With a gamma distribution of mutation effects, it can be shown that the among line variance of genotypic values is
(S. P. OTTO, personal communication). In terms of the coefficient of variation of mutagen intake, the genetic variance is
Thus, between line variation in dosage inflates the genetic variance by a factor 1 + U (CVD)2 ß/(ß + 1). The greatest inflation in the among line variance occurs for the case of equal mutation effects (ß
), and declines to zero for increasingly leptokurtic distributions of effects. For example, with a gamma distribution of mutation effects with shape parameter 0.5, a coefficient of variation in mutagen dose of 25%, and U = 10 (cf. Table 4), the among line variance would be inflated by about 21% compared to uniform dosage.
Comparison of the spectra of EMS-induced and spontaneous mutation events:
A major difference between the spectra of spontaneous and EMS mutations is that a high fraction of spontaneous events are associated with TE insertion (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
EMS mutagenesis, under standard conditions, generates mostly G/C
A / T transitions and a small fraction of large scale aberrations detectable by Southern blotting (reviewed by ![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
A / T transitions, the type of mutation event usually generated by EMS, and that spontaneous transitions and transversions occur at approximately equal frequencies, a conclusion also drawn by ![]()
A / T transitions, but A / T
G/C transitions generate no nonsense mutations at all. However, the population survey data show that spontaneous base pair changes also include A / T
T/A and G/C
T/A transversions, both of which generate a higher fraction of nonsense mutations than G/C
A / T transitions. It can tentatively be concluded that EMS tends to generate somewhat milder mutagenic effects than non-TE spontaneous mutation events in Drosophila.
Prediction of spontaneous mutation parameters from the EMS data:
It is possible to predict spontaneous mutation parameters such as the rate of change of trait mean per generation by scaling the parameter estimates from the EMS experiment using two different sources of information: (1) Lethal frequency model. Rates for spontaneous lethal mutation are well known in Drosophila, and are typically about 0.005 for the second chromosome per generation (![]()
![]()
![]()
M */M) and predicted spontaneous mutational coefficients of variation (CVM) are shown in Table 6. Predictions were derived using conversion factors from the above calculations, that is, for
M */M, values of
M/M from Table 1 were divided by 84 for the lethal frequency model, or by 364 for the bristle variance model; for CVM , values of CVg from Table 1 were divided by either
or
, since mutational variance accumulates linearly with generation number (![]()
M */M and CVM on a per genome basis, values were multiplied by 2.5 to account for the fact that chromosome 2 in Drosophila represents about two-fifths of the genome.
|
Predicted
M */M and CVM may now be compared with values observed in other spontaneous mutation accumulation experiments, for which there are data for several quantitative traits (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
M/M figure for hatchability agrees almost perfectly with the observed figure of -0.093% from the spontaneous mutation accumulation experiment of FERNANDEZ and LOPEZ-FANJUL (1996) (![]()
M /M for viability in the range -1 to -2% (summarized by ![]()
M /M values downwards. Second, spontaneous mutations could be dominated by a class of event which does not occur under EMS mutagenesis, for example, TE insertion. If these events generate directional effects with approximately equivalent values, the rate of change of mean viability could be large relative to the rate of change of variance (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We wish to thank IAN WHITE for statistical advice, BILL HILL for pointing out the additivity property of the gamma distribution, ARMANDO CABALLERO, AURORA GARCIA-DORADO, BILL HILL, TRUDY MACKAY, SALLY OTTO, and STUART WEST for helpful comments and advice, and the Royal Society (P.D.K.) for support.
Manuscript received June 4, 1997; Accepted for publication October 15, 1997.
| LITERATURE CITED |
|---|
AJIOKA, J. W., and D. L. HARTL, 1989 Population dynamics of transposable elements, pp. 939958 in Mobile DNA, edited by D. E. BERG and M. M. HOWE. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, DC.
AKASHI, H., 1996 Molecular evolution between Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans: reduced codon bias, faster rates of amino acid substitution, and larger proteins in D. melanogaster. Genetics 144:1297-1307[Abstract].
ALDERSON, T., 1968 Chemically induced delayed germinal mutations in Drosophila. Nature 207:164-167.
ASHBURNER, M., 1989 Drosophila: A Laboratory Manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, New York.
AYAKI, T., K. OHSHIMA, Y. OKUMURA, I. YOSHIKAWA, and T. SHIOMI, 1984 The relationship between lethal mutation yield and intake of ethylnitrosourea (ENU) in Drosophila melanogaster. Environ. Mutagen. 6:483-488[Medline].
BARTON, N. H. and M. TURELLI, 1989 Evolutionary quantitative genetics: how little do we know? Annu. Rev. Genet. 23:337-370[Medline].
BATEMAN, A. J., 1959 The viability of near-normal irradiated chromosomes. Intern. J. Radiat. Biol. 1:170-180.
CABALLERO, A. and P. D. KEIGHLEY, 1998 Inferences on genome-wide deleterious mutation rates in inbred populations of Drosophila and mice. Genetica in press.
CROW, J. F., 1997 The high spontaneous mutation rate: is it a health risk? Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94:8380-8386
CROW, J. F., and M. J. SIMMONS, 1983 The mutation load in Drosophila, pp. 135 in The Genetics and Biology of Drosophila, Vol. 3C, edited by M. ASHBURNER, H. L. CARSON and J. N. THOMPSON. Academic Press, London.
EANES, W. F., C. WESLEY, J. HEY, D. HOULE, and J. W. AJIOKA, 1988 The fitness consequences of P element insertion in Drosophila melanogaster. Genet. Res. 52:1-26.
ENGELS, W. R., 1989 P elements in Drosophila melanogster, pp. 437484 in Mobile DNA, edited by D. E. BERG and M. M. HOWE. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, DC.
FERNANDEZ, J. and C. LOPEZ-FANJUL, 1996 Spontaneous mutational variances and covariances for fitness-related traits in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 143:829-837[Abstract].
FISHER, R. A., 1930 The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
FRANKHAM, R., 1980 Origin of genetic variation in selection lines, pp. 5668 in Selection Experiments in Laboratory and Domestic Animals, edited by A. ROBERTSON. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough, UK.
FRANKHAM, R., 1990 Are responses to artificial selection for reproductive fitness characters consistently asymmetrical? Genet. Res. 56:35-42.
GARCIA-DORADO, A., 1997 The rate of effects distribution of viability mutation in Drosophila: minimum distance estimation. Evolution 51:1130-1139.
GARCIA-DORADO, A. and J. A. GONZALEZ, 1996 Stabilizing selection detected for bristle number in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 50:1573-1578.
GREEN, M. M., 1988 Mobile DNA elements and spontaneous gene mutation. Banbury Rep. 30:41-50.
GRUNDL, E., and L. DEMPFLE, 1990 Effects of spontaneous and induced mutations on selection response. Proc. 4th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Edinburgh XIII: 177194.
HALEY, C. S., G. J. LEE, R. WEBB, and S. A. KNOTT, 1993 Evidence on the genetic control of LH release in response to GnRH from crosses between selected lines of sheep. Livestock Prod. Sci. 37:153-167.
HILL, W. G., and P. D. KEIGHTLEY, 1988 Interrelations of mutation, population size, artificial and natural selection, pp. 5770 in Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Quantitative Genetics, edited by B. S. WEIR, E. J. EISEN, M. M. GOODMAN and G. NAMKOONG, Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.
HOULE, D., 1992 Comparing evolvability and variability of quantitative traits. Genetics 130:195-204[Abstract].
HOULE, D., K. A. HUGHES, D. K. HOFFMASTER, J. IHARA, and S. ASSIMACOPOULOS et al., 1994 The effects of spontaneous mutation on quantitative traits. I. Variances and covariances of life history traits. Genetics 138:773-785[Abstract].
HOULE, D., B. MORIKAWA, and M. LYNCH, 1996 Comparing mutational variabilities. Genetics 143:1467-1483[Abstract].
KEIGHTLEY, P. D., 1994 The distribution of mutation effects on viability in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 138:1315-1322[Abstract].
KEIGHTLEY, P. D., 1996 Nature of deleterious mutation load in Drosophila. Genetics 144:1993-1999[Abstract].
KEIGHTLEY, P. D. and A. CABALLERO, 1997 Genomic mutation rates for lifetime reproductive output and lifespan in Caenorhabditis elegans. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94:3823-3827
KEIGHTLEY, P. D. and W. G. HILL, 1990 Variation maintained in quantitative traits with mutation-selection balance: pleiotropic side-effects on fitness traits. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 242:95-100.
KEIGHTLEY, P. D., T. F. C. MACKAY, and A. CABALLERO, 1993 Accounting for bias in estimates of the rate of polygenic mutation. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 253:291-296[Medline].
KITAGAWA, O., 1967 The effects of X-ray irradiation on selection response in Drosophila melanogaster. Jpn. J. Genet. 42:121-137.
KOIVISTO, K. and P. PORTIN, 1987 Induction of mutations which shorten the life span in Drosophila melanogaster. Hereditas 106:83-87.
KREITMAN, M. and R. R. HUDSON, 1991 Inferring the evolutionary histories of the Adh and Adh-dup loci in Drosophila melanogaster from patterns of polymorphism and divergence. Genetics 127:565-582[Abstract].
LAI, C., R. F. LYMAN, A. D. LONG, C. H. LANGLEY, and T. F. C. MACKAY, 1995 Naturally occurring variation in bristle number and DNA polymorphisms at the scabrous locus of Drosophila melanogaster. Science 266:1697-1702.
LANDE, R., 1995 Mutation and conservation. Conservation Biol. 9:782-791.
LANGLEY, C. H., E. A. MONTGOMERY, R. R. HUDSON, N. L. KAPLAN, and B. CHARLESWORTH, 1988 On the role of unequal exchange in the containment of transposable element copy number. Genet. Res. 52:223-235[Medline].
LEWIS, E. B. and F. BACHER, 1968 Method of feeding ethyl methanesulfonate (EMS) to Drosophila males. Dros. Inf. Serv. 43:193.
LONG, A. D., S. L. MULLANEY, L. A. REID, J. D. FRY, and C. H. LANGLEY et al., 1995 High resolution mapping of genetic factors affecting abdominal bristle number in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 139:1273-1291[Abstract].
LOPEZ, M. A. and C. LOPEZ-FANJUL, 1993 Spontaneous mutation for a quantitative trait in Drosophila melanogaster. I. Response to artificial selection. Genet. Res. 62:107-116.
LYMAN, R. F., F. LAWRENCE, S. V. NUZHDIN, and T. F. C. MACKAY, 1996 Effects of single P-element insertions on bristle number and viability in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 143:277-292[Abstract].
LYNCH, M., 1988 The rate of polygenic mutation. Genet. Res. 51:137-148[Medline].
LYNCH, M. and W. G. HILL, 1986 Phenotypic evolution by neutral mutation. Evolution 40:915-935.
LYNCH, M., J. CONERY, and R. BURGER, 1995 Mutation accumulation and the extinction of small populations. Am. Nat. 146:489-518.
MACKAY, T. F. C., 1995 The genetic basis of quantitative variation: numbers of sensory bristles of Drosophila melanogaster as a model system. Trends Genet. 11:464-470[Medline].
MACKAY, T. F. C., R. LYMAN, and M. S. JACKSON, 1992 Effects of P element insertions on quantitative traits in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 130:315-332[Abstract].
MACKAY, T. F. C., J. D. FRY, R. F. LYMAN, and S. V. NUZHDIN, 1994 Polygenic mutation in Drosophila melanogaster: estimates from response to selection in inbred strains. Genetics 136:937-951[Abstract].
MERCHANTE, M., A. CABALLERO, and C. LOPEZ-FANJUL, 1995 Response to selection from new mutation and effective






).