Piter Bijma

Bio: Piter Bijma is an academic researcher from Wageningen University and Research Centre. The author has contributed to research in topics: Selection (genetic algorithm) & Population. The author has an hindex of 48, co-authored 224 publications receiving 6976 citations.

Multilevel Selection 1: Quantitative Genetics of Inheritance and Response to Selection

Abstract: Interaction among individuals is universal, both in animals and in plants, and substantially affects evolution of natural populations and responses to artificial selection in agriculture. Although quantitative genetics has successfully been applied to many traits, it does not provide a general theory accounting for interaction among individuals and selection acting on multiple levels. Consequently, current quantitative genetic theory fails to explain why some traits do not respond to selection among individuals, but respond greatly to selection among groups. Understanding the full impacts of heritable interactions on the outcomes of selection requires a quantitative genetic framework including all levels of selection and relatedness. Here we present such a framework and provide expressions for the response to selection. Results show that interaction among individuals may create substantial heritable variation, which is hidden to classical analyses. Selection acting on higher levels of organization captures this hidden variation and therefore always yields positive response, whereas individual selection may yield response in the opposite direction. Our work provides testable predictions of response to multilevel selection and reduces to classical theory in the absence of interaction. Statistical methodology provided elsewhere enables empirical application of our work to both natural and domestic populations.

Inbreeding in genome‐wide selection

Abstract: Traditional selection methods, such as sib and best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) selection, which increased genetic gain by increasing accuracy of evaluation have also led to an increased rate of inbreeding per generation (DeltaFG). This is not necessarily the case with genome-wide selection, which also increases genetic gain by increasing accuracy. This paper explains why genome-wide selection reduces DeltaFG when compared with sib and BLUP selection. Genome-wide selection achieves high accuracies of estimated breeding values through better prediction of the Mendelian sampling term component of breeding values. This increases differentiation between sibs and reduces coselection of sibs and DeltaFG. The high accuracy of genome-wide selection is expected to reduce the between family variance and reweigh the emphasis of estimated breeding values of individuals towards the Mendelian sampling term. Moreover, estimation induced intraclass correlations of sibs are expected to be lower in genome-wide selection leading to a further decrease of coselection of sibs when compared with BLUP. Genome-wide prediction of breeding values, therefore, enables increased genetic gain while at the same time reducing DeltaFG when compared with sib and BLUP selection.

The joint effects of kin, multilevel selection and indirect genetic effects on response to genetic selection

Abstract: Kin and levels-of-selection models are common approaches for modelling social evolution Indirect genetic effect (IGE) models represent a different approach, specifying social effects on trait values rather than fitness We investigate the joint effect of relatedness, multilevel selection and IGEs on response to selection We present a measure for the degree of multilevel selection, which is the natural partner of relatedness in expressions for response Response depends on both relatedness and the degree of multilevel selection, rather than only one or the other factor Moreover, response is symmetric in relatedness and the degree of multilevel selection, indicating that both factors have exactly the same effect Without IGEs, the key parameter is the product of relatedness and the degree of multilevel selection With IGEs, however, multilevel selection without relatedness can explain evolution of social traits Thus, next to relatedness and multilevel selection, IGEs are a key element in the genetical theory of social evolution

Multilevel Selection 2: Estimating the Genetic Parameters Determining Inheritance and Response to Selection

Abstract: Interactions among individuals are universal, both in animals and in plants and in natural as well as domestic populations. Understanding the consequences of these interactions for the evolution of populations by either natural or artificial selection requires knowledge of the heritable components underlying them. Here we present statistical methodology to estimate the genetic parameters determining response to multilevel selection of traits affected by interactions among individuals in general populations. We apply these methods to obtain estimates of genetic parameters for survival days in a population of layer chickens with high mortality due to pecking behavior. We find that heritable variation is threefold greater than that obtained from classical analyses, meaning that two-thirds of the full heritable variation is hidden to classical analysis due to social interactions. As a consequence, predicted responses to multilevel selection applied to this population are threefold greater than classical predictions. This work, combined with the quantitative genetic theory for response to multilevel selection presented in an accompanying article in this issue, enables the design of selection programs to effectively reduce competitive interactions in livestock and plants and the prediction of the effects of social interactions on evolution in natural populations undergoing multilevel selection.

Human biochemical genetics

Abstract: So far in this course we have dealt entirely with the evolution of characters that are controlled by simple Mendelian inheritance at a single locus. There are notes on the course website about gametic disequilibrium and how allele frequencies change at two loci simultaneously, but we didn’t discuss them. In every example we’ve considered we’ve imagined that we could understand something about evolution by examining the evolution of a single gene. That’s the domain of classical population genetics. For the next few weeks we’re going to be exploring a field that’s actually older than classical population genetics, although the approach we’ll be taking to it involves the use of population genetic machinery. If you know a little about the history of evolutionary biology, you may know that after the rediscovery of Mendel’s work in 1900 there was a heated debate between the “biometricians” (e.g., Galton and Pearson) and the “Mendelians” (e.g., de Vries, Correns, Bateson, and Morgan). Biometricians asserted that the really important variation in evolution didn’t follow Mendelian rules. Height, weight, skin color, and similar traits seemed to