HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (5) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Jannink, J.-L. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Jannink, J.-L. Agricola Articles by Jannink, J.-L. Related Collections Crop Genetics Biometrics

Selection Dynamics and Limits under Additive x Additive Epistatic Gene Action

Department of Agronomy, Iowa State University, 1208 Agronomy Hall, Ames, IA 50011-1010

View larger version (37K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Comparison of Castle-Wright ratios under pure additive x additive epistasis (CWAxA) versus under additive (CWAdd) gene action. Allele frequencies only go to 0.5 in the graph because it is symmetrical. Positive values on the Z axis indicate greater limiting response to selection relative to initial additive variance under epistatic than additive gene action.

View larger version (18K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Response to selection in the population mean under additive and epistatic models.

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Response to selection of the expected population mean in the parental sample, random-mated line population, and in line populations at linkage equilibrium under additive by additive epistasis with effective population size N = 8.

View larger version (18K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Response to selection per cycle in the expected population mean under additive x additive epistasis as a function of recombination frequency, r. Within each graph, the upper and lower pair of curves show, respectively, the response due to shifts in allele frequencies and due to covariance in allele content (see text).

View larger version (18K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Response to selection in the population mean under epistatic (A) and additive (B) models.