PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Margarida Matos

Publications and source records attributed to Margarida Matos.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Symmetry breaking in interspecific Drosophila hybrids is not due to developmental noise.

Hybrids from crosses of different species have been reported to display decreased developmental stability when compared to their pure species, which is conventionally attributed to a breakdown of coadapted gene complexes. Drosophila subobscura and its close relative D. madeirensis were hybridized in the laboratory to test the hypothesis that genuine fluctuating asymmetry, measured as the within-individual variance between right and left wings that results from random perturbations in development, would significantly increase after interspecific hybridization. When sires of D. subobscura were mated to heterospecific females following a hybrid half-sib breeding design, F1 hybrid females showed a large bilateral asymmetry with a substantial proportion of individuals having an asymmetric index larger than 5% of total wing size. Such an anomaly, however, cannot be plainly explained by an increase of developmental instability in hybrids but is the result of some aberrant developmental processes. Our findings suggest that interspecific hybrids are as able as their parents to buffer developmental noise, notwithstanding the fact that their proper bilateral development can be harshly compromised. Together with the low correspondence between the co-variation structures of the interindividual genetic components and the within-individual ones from a Procrustes analysis, our data also suggest that the underlying processes that control (genetic) canalization and developmental stability do not share a common mechanism. We argue that the conventional account of decreased developmental stability in interspecific hybrids needs to be reappraised.

Animals↗

Quantitative genetics of functional characters in Drosophila melanogaster populations subjected to laboratory selection.

What are the genetics of phenotypes other than fitness, in outbred populations? To answer this question, the quantitative-genetic basis of divergence was characterized for outbred Drosophila melanogaster populations that had previously undergone selection to enhance characters related to fitness. Line-cross analysis using first-generation and second-generation hybrids from reciprocal crosses was conducted for two types of cross, each replicated fivefold. One type of cross was between representatives of the ancestral population, a set of five populations maintained for several hundred generations on a two-week discrete-generation life cycle and a set of five populations adapted to starvation stress. The other type of cross was between the same set of ancestral-representative populations and another set of five populations selected for accelerated development from egg to egg. Developmental time from egg to eclosion, starvation resistance, dry body weight and fecundity at day 14 from egg were fit to regression models estimating single-locus additive and dominant effects, maternal and paternal effects, and digenic additive and dominance epistatic effects. Additive genetic variation explained most of the differences between populations, with additive maternal and cytoplasmic effects also commonly found. Both within-locus and between-locus dominance effects were inferred in some cases, as well as one instance of additive epistasis. Some of these effects may have been caused by linkage disequilibrium. We conclude with a brief discussion concerning the relationship of the genetics of population differentiation to adaptation.

Animals↗

Convergence to a novel environment: comparative method versus experimental evolution.

Laboratory adaptation allows researchers to contrast temporal studies of experimental evolution with comparative studies. The comparative method is here taken to mean the inference of microevolutionary processes from comparisons among contemporaneous populations of diverse origins, from one or multiple species. The data contrasted here come from Drosophila subobscura populations that were introduced to the laboratory at several different times and from two different locations. Two questions were addressed. First, can we correctly infer evolutionary dynamics from comparative data collected simultaneously from disparate populations? In most cases, we could, except for the character of starvation resistance. Second, are the evolutionary dynamics inferred from the comparative approach similar to those revealed by temporal studies of experimental evolution? For fecundity characters, they were. Overall the results show that both comparative and temporal studies are useful, though the former can be uninformative for characters with complex evolutionary trajectories.

Adaptation, Biological↗