A general method for the detection of additive, dominance and epistatic components of variation III. F2 and backcross populations.

doi:10.1038/HDY.1970.42

Home
/
Papers
/
A general method for the detection of additive, dominance and epistatic components of variation III. F2 and backcross populations.

Journal Article•DOI•

A general method for the detection of additive, dominance and epistatic components of variation III. F2 and backcross populations.

John L. Jinks¹, Jean M Perkins¹•Institutions (1)

University of Birmingham¹

01 Aug 1970-Heredity (Nature Publishing Group)-Vol. 25, Iss: 3, pp 419-429

TL;DR: A general method for the detection of additive, dominance and epistatic components of variation III of F 2 and backcross populations.

read less

Abstract: A general method for the detection of additive, dominance and epistatic components of variation III. F 2 and backcross populations

...read moreread less

Content maybe subject to copyright Report

Citations

PDF

Open Access

More filters

Journal Article•DOI•

A progressive approach to non‐additivity and genotype‐environmental covariance in the analysis of human differences

[...]

Lindon J. Eaves, Nicholas G. Martin, John L. Jinks

01 May 1977-British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology

TL;DR: A comprehensive framework of theory and method is outlined in which various typos of non-additivity and non-independence of gene and environmental action and interaction—genotype—environment interaction and covariation, dominance and assortative mating can be critically assessed.

...read moreread less

Abstract: No aspect of human behaviour genetics has caused more confusion and generated more obscurantism than the analysis and interpretation of the various typos of non-additivity and non-independence of gene and environmental action and interaction—genotype—environment interaction and covariation, dominance and assortative mating. A comprehensive framework of theory and method is outlined in which these and other contributions to individual differences can be critically assessed.

...read moreread less

236 citations

Cites background from "A general method for the detection ..."

...…of data and theory relating to the analysis of 0 x lD in species other than man (e.g. Haldane, 1946; Mather & Jones, 1958; Bucio-AIanis et al. 1969; Jinks & Perkins, 1970; Jinks & Connolly, 1975; Mather & Ca.liga.ri, 1975), there have long been attempts-not always successful-to specify CovOlD in…...
[...]

Journal Article•DOI•

Environmental and genotype-environmental components of variability VIII. Relations between genotypes grown in different environments and measures of these environments

[...]

G H Freeman, Jean M Perkins

01 Aug 1971-Heredity

TL;DR: Environmental and genotype-environmental components of variability VIII.

...read moreread less

Abstract: Environmental and genotype-environmental components of variability VIII. Relations between genotypes grown in different environments and measures of these environments

...read moreread less

236 citations

Journal Article•DOI•

Predicting the properties of recombinant inbred lines derived by single seed descent

[...]

John L. Jinks¹, Harpal S. Pooni¹•Institutions (1)

University of Birmingham¹

01 Apr 1976-Heredity

TL;DR: The genetical components of family means and variances, simply and reliably estimated in the first few generations of any breeding programme initiated from a cross between two inbreeding lines, are all that is required to predict the distribution of the inbred lines that can be derived by single seed descent from the F2 of such a cross.

...read moreread less

Abstract: The genetical components of family means and variances, simply and reliably estimated in the first few generations of any breeding programme initiated from a cross between two inbred lines, are all that is required to predict the distribution of the inbred lines that can be derived by single seed descent from the F2 of such a cross. We can, therefore, determine the probability of obtaining inbreds that fall outside of the parental range or of exceeding the F1 if it shows heterosis, by any amount we care to specify. While epistasis, genotype × environmental interactions and linkage may at first sight appear to seriously disturb any such prediction they can all be accommodated. In practice only epistasis is expected and found to produce disturbances of a sufficient magnitude to justify making allowance for its presence in making these predictions. This is because it leads to asymmetry in the distribution of derived inbreds relative to the initial inbred parental means. The predictive power of this new approach is demonstrated on two complete breeding cycles, each initiated by a cross between two pure-breeding varieties of Nicotiana rustica and culminating in the production of over 100 recombinant, pure-breeding lines. The ability of the analysis to discriminate between two crosses on the basis of their probabilities of producing inbred lines that fall outside of their parental range is also demonstrated. By using analyses of this kind there is no reason why we need ever go beyond the F2 of an inbreeding programme without a fairly clear idea of the outcome.

...read moreread less

178 citations

Book Chapter•DOI•

Biometrical Genetics of Heterosis

[...]

J. L. Jinks¹•Institutions (1)

University of Birmingham¹

01 Jan 1983

TL;DR: In this article, the procedures of biometrical genetics (Mather and Jinks 1971, 1977, 1982) are used to define and analyse heterosis in terms of the actions and interactions of genes of the kinds that are well established in classical Mendelian genetics.

...read moreread less

Abstract: In this chapter the procedures of biometrical genetics (Mather and Jinks 1971, 1977, 1982) will be used to define and analyse heterosis in terms of the actions and interactions of genes of the kinds that are well established in classical Mendelian genetics. Quantitative models, experimental designs and statistical analyses will be described that can accommodate all kinds of gene action and interaction at any number of loci in the presence of any level of linkage disequilibrium and genotype x environment interaction and apportion their contributions to heterosis.

...read moreread less

108 citations

Journal Article•DOI•

Comparing predictions of mean performance and environmental sensitivity of recombinant inbred lines based upon F3 and triple test cross families

[...]

John L. Jinks¹, Harpal S. Pooni¹•Institutions (1)

University of Birmingham¹

01 Dec 1980-Heredity

TL;DR: The method to predict the properties of the pure breeding lines extractable from the cross by single seed descent is extended to properties such as mean performance and environmental sensitivity that can be measured only by replicating each family or generation over two or more contrasting environments.

...read moreread less

Abstract: Comparing predictions of mean performance and environmental sensitivity of recombinant inbred lines based upon F 3 and triple test cross families

...read moreread less

52 citations

1
2
3
4
…
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

Collapse

References

PDF

Open Access

More filters

Journal Article•DOI•

The analysis of continuous variation in a diallel cross of nicotiana rustica varieties

[...]

J. L. Jinks¹•Institutions (1)

University of Birmingham¹

01 Nov 1954-Genetics

645 citations

Estimation of average dominance of genes.

[...]

R. E. Comstock, H. F. Robinson, J. W. Gowen

01 Jan 1952

557 citations

Journal Article•DOI•

Estimation of the Components of Heterosis.

[...]

J. L. Jinks¹, R. Morley Jones¹•Institutions (1)

University of Birmingham¹

01 Mar 1958-Genetics

TL;DR: The finding that the F, generation of crosses show- ing nonallelic interactions were in general superior in their performance to those of noninteracting crosses appears to implicate nonalle Lic interactions as a major source of heterosis.

...read moreread less

Abstract: In previous papers (JINKS 19544,1956) the analysis of the parents, F,’s, F2’s and I backcross generations of an 8 x 8 diallel between inbred varieties of Nico- tiana rustica using the method of diallel analysis described by JINKS and HAY- MAN (1953), and extended by SINKS (1954), HAYMAN (1954), DICKINSON and JINKS (1956) and JINKS (1956) have been presented. They showed that non- allelic interactions, as well as additive and dominance effects, play an important role in the inheritance of all the three characters followed, namely, final height, time of flowering and leaf size. This finding was subsequently confirmed for a number of diallel sets of crosses in other species where a wide range of characters were followed (JINKS 1955; ALLARD 1956). What is more important to our pres- ent discussion, however, was the finding that the F, generation of crosses show- ing nonallelic interactions were in general superior in their performance to those of noninteracting crosses. This appears to implicate nonallelic interactions as a major source of heterosis, and we shall now attempt to assess the magnitude of their contribution relative to those of the other components of heterosis.

...read moreread less

337 citations

Journal Article•DOI•

A general method of detecting additive, dominance and epistatic variation for metrical traits I. Theory

[...]

Michael J. Kearsey¹, John L. Jinks¹•Institutions (1)

University of Birmingham¹

01 Aug 1968-Heredity

TL;DR: A general method of detecting additive, dominance and epistatic variation for metrical traits I.

...read moreread less

Abstract: A general method of detecting additive, dominance and epistatic variation for metrical traits I. Theory

...read moreread less

238 citations

Journal Article•DOI•

Environmental and genotype-environmental components of variability VIII. Relations between genotypes grown in different environments and measures of these environments

[...]

G H Freeman, Jean M Perkins

01 Aug 1971-Heredity

TL;DR: Environmental and genotype-environmental components of variability VIII.

...read moreread less

Abstract: Environmental and genotype-environmental components of variability VIII. Relations between genotypes grown in different environments and measures of these environments

...read moreread less

236 citations

"A general method for the detection ..." refers background or methods in this paper

...1 1 1 Additive component 2 1 —l Dominance component 3 1 1 —2 Epistatic component The variance of comparison 2 over all n sets of progeny families (i = to n) is used to detect and estimate the dominance component of variation in the original analysis of Comstock and Robinson (1952) and in the modified analysis of Kearsey and Jinks (1968). Similarly, the squared deviations of comparison 3 summed over all n sets is used to detect an epistatic component of variation in the analysis proposed by Kearsey and Jinks (1968). The variance of comparison 1 over the n sets detects and estimates the additive component of variation but it differs from the comparable statistic in the original analysis which is based on L1 and L2 (Kearsey and Jinks, 1968)....
[...]
...Following Kearsey andJinks (1968) andJinks, Perkins and Breese (1969) we will denote the cross between the ith individual from the F3 or backcross population and the inbred parent with the higher score by L11, the corresponding cross with the other parent by L2j and the cross to the F1 by L3j. The presence of epistasis may be detected where all three kinds of crosses are made by the method described by Kearsey and Jinks (1968). In the absence of epistasis, additive and dominance components of variation may then be estimated by the method of Comstock and Robinson (1952)....
[...]
...We can, however, pursue the analysis further in the way described by Perkins andJinks (1970). Thus the epistasis sum of squares for 40 degrees of freedom can be subdivided into an item for one degree of freedom testing the mean value of the epistatic term (L1 + L2 —2L3) over all 40 sets of progeny families and an item for 39 degrees of freedom for the remainder which test variation in the value of the epistatic term over the 40 sets of families around this mean value. The sum of squares of replicates for 40 degrees of freedom can also be partitioned into corresponding items for one and 39 degrees of freedom respectively. The value of this further partitioning is that for F2 populations the overall epistatic item tests for i type epistasis (homozygote x homozygote interactions) and the variation among sets tests for j and I types of epistasis (homozygote x heterozygote and heterozygote x heterozygote interactions, respectively). This analysis and its interpretation, which are described by Perkins and Jinks (1970), do not separate the kinds of epistasis in such a clear way for back-cross populations....
[...]
...We can, however, pursue the analysis further in the way described by Perkins andJinks (1970). Thus the epistasis sum of squares for 40 degrees of freedom can be subdivided into an item for one degree of freedom testing the mean value of the epistatic term (L1 + L2 —2L3) over all 40 sets of progeny families and an item for 39 degrees of freedom for the remainder which test variation in the value of the epistatic term over the 40 sets of families around this mean value....
[...]
...For those experiments where the North Carolina III design has been used (see section 2) the test for epistasis is not applicable and additive and dominance components may be detected and estimated, assuming no epistasis, using the standard design III analysis as described by Kearsey and Jinks (1968). The estimates of D, H and F for all sets of data derived from either the triple test cross analysis or the design III analysis are given in table 5 along with their significance levels....
[...]