Background check: Mutational input to size variation depends on ancestor’s breeding value

preprint OA: closed
Full text JSON View at publisher

Abstract

The phenotypic effects of mutations often depend on the genetic background, yet general patterns remain poorly resolved. Here, we tested whether genotypes drawn from the same natural population, but differing in their breeding values for a polygenic trait, differed in their contribution of new mutational variation to that trait. We established >200 mutation-accumulation (MA) lines from four Drosophila serrata genotypes. Analysing >44,000 wing-size measurements, collected over 30 generations, we quantified mutational variance and mutational bias for size. Genotypes with the smallest and largest breeding values for size contributed similar (statistically indistinguishable) amounts of mutational variance. In contrast, the genotype with an intermediate breeding value exhibited remarkably low (statistically undetectable) mutational variance, low micro-environmental variance, and high line survival over time, consistent with limited mutational decay in fitness. The three genotypes with detectable mutational input showed declines in mean size over time, indicating a consistent mutational bias toward smaller size, as reported in other taxa. The magnitude of this bias appeared genotype dependent, with the MA populations founded from the larger ancestors declining nearly twice as fast as that founded from the smallest ancestor. Together, these results demonstrate substantial heterogeneity in mutational properties among genotypes within a single natural population where the trait value spans a relatively narrow range. Such genotype-specific mutational input is expected to shape both the standing genetic variance and the evolutionary trajectory of polygenic traits.
Full text 1,768 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Abstract The phenotypic effects of mutations often depend on the genetic background, yet general patterns remain poorly resolved. Here, we tested whether genotypes drawn from the same natural population, but differing in their breeding values for a polygenic trait, differed in their contribution of new mutational variation to that trait. We established >200 mutation-accumulation (MA) lines from four Drosophila serrata genotypes. Analysing >44,000 wing-size measurements, collected over 30 generations, we quantified mutational variance and mutational bias for size. Genotypes with the smallest and largest breeding values for size contributed similar (statistically indistinguishable) amounts of mutational variance. In contrast, the genotype with an intermediate breeding value exhibited remarkably low (statistically undetectable) mutational variance, low micro-environmental variance, and high line survival over time, consistent with limited mutational decay in fitness. The three genotypes with detectable mutational input showed declines in mean size over time, indicating a consistent mutational bias toward smaller size, as reported in other taxa. The magnitude of this bias appeared genotype dependent, with the MA populations founded from the larger ancestors declining nearly twice as fast as that founded from the smallest ancestor. Together, these results demonstrate substantial heterogeneity in mutational properties among genotypes within a single natural population where the trait value spans a relatively narrow range. Such genotype-specific mutational input is expected to shape both the standing genetic variance and the evolutionary trajectory of polygenic traits. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2026) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00