Free Standard AU & NZ Shipping For All Book Orders Over $80!
Register      Login
Crop and Pasture Science Crop and Pasture Science Society
Plant sciences, sustainable farming systems and food quality
Shopping Cart: ( empty )
You are here: Home > Journals > CP > AR05152
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Contents Vol 56(9)

The struggle to exploit non-additive variation

Bruce Walsh
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

Departments of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Molecular and Cellular Biology, Animal Science, Plant Science, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA. Email: jbwalsh@u.arizona.edu

Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 56(9) 873-881 https://doi.org/10.1071/AR05152
Submitted: 9 May 2005  Accepted: 20 June 2005   Published: 28 September 2005

Abstract

Whereas animal breeders largely focus on improvement using additive genetic variance, inbreeding and asexual reproduction allow plant breeders to at least partially exploit non-additive genetic variance as well. We briefly review various approaches used by breeders to exploit dominance and epistatic variance, discuss their constraints and limitations, and examine what (if anything) can be done to improve our ability to further use often untapped genetic variation.

Additional keywords: dominance, epistasis, epistatic genetic variance, inbreeding.


References


Bernardo, R (2002). ‘Breeding for quantitative traits in plants.’ (Stemma Press: Woodbury, MI)

Bulmer, MG (1980). ‘The mathematical theory of quantitative genetics.’ (Oxford University Press: New York)

Bürger, R (2000). ‘The mathematical theory of selection, recombination, and mutation.’ (Wiley: New York)

Cheverud JM, Routman E (1996) Epistasis as a source of increased additive genetic variance at population bottlenecks. Evolution; International Journal of Organic Evolution 50, 1042–1051. open url image1

Cockerham CC (1954) An extension of the concept of partitioning hereditary variance for analysis of covariances among relatives when epistasis is present. Genetics 39, 859–882. open url image1

Cockerham CC (1983) Covariances of relatives from self-fertilization. Crop Science 23, 1177–1180. open url image1

Cockerham CC (1984) Covariances of relatives for quantitative characters with drift. ‘Human population genetics’. (Ed. A Charkravarti) pp. 195–208. (Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., Inc.: New York)

Cockerham CC (1984b) Additive by additve variance with inbreeding and linkage. Genetics 108, 487–500.
| PubMed |
open url image1

Cockerham CC, Tachida H (1988) Permanency of response to selection for quantitative characters in finite populations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 85, 1563–1565.
| PubMed |
open url image1

Cooper M, Podlich DW, Smith OS (2005) Gene-to-phenotype models and complex trait genetics. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 56, 943–966. open url image1

Cornelius PL (1988) Properties of components of covariances of inbred relatives and their estimates in a maize population. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 75, 701–711.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Dickerson GE (1969) Techniques for research in quantitative animal genetics. ‘Techniques and procedures in animal science research’. pp. 36–79. (American Society of Animal Science: Albany, NY)

Edwards JW, Lamkey KR (2002) Quantitative genetics of inbreeding in a synthetic maize population. Crop Science 42, 1094–1104. open url image1

Fisher RA (1918) The correlation between relatives on the supposition of Mendelian inheritance. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 52, 399–433. open url image1

Gallais A (1975) Selection with truncation in autotetraploids: comparison with diploids. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 46, 386–394. open url image1

Gallais, A (2003). ‘Quantitative genetics and breeding methods in autopolyploid plants.’ (INRA: Paris)

Harris DL (1964) Genotypic covariances between inbred relatives. Genetics 50, 1319–1348.
| PubMed |
open url image1

Holland JB (2001) Epistasis and plant breeding. Plant Breeding Reviews 21, 27–92. open url image1

Kempthorne O (1954) The correlation between relatives in a random mating population. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences 143, 103–113. open url image1

Lynch, M ,  and  Walsh, B (1998). ‘Genetics and analysis of quantitative traits.’ (Sinauer Associates: Sunderland, MA)

Melchinger AE (1999) Genetic diversity and heterosis. ‘The genetics and exploitation of heterosis in crops’. (Eds JG Coors, S Pandey) pp. 99–118. (American Society of Agronomy: Madison, WI)

Robertson A (1952) The effect of inbreeding on the variation due to recessive genes. Genetics 37, 189–207. open url image1

Tachida H, Cockerham CC (1989) Effects of identity disequilibrium and linkage on quantitative variation in finite populations. Genetical Research 53, 63–70.
| PubMed |
open url image1

Walsh B (2002) Quantitative genetics, genomics and the future of plant breeding. ‘Quantitative genetics, genomics and plant breeding’. (Ed. MS Kang) pp. 23–32. (CABI Publishing: New York)

Walsh, B ,  and  Lynch, M (2005). ‘Selection and evolution of quantitative traits.’ (In prep.) Draft chapters can be found on the web at "http://nitro.biosci.arizona.edu/zbook/volume_2/vol2.html. (Sinauer Associates: Sunderland, MA)

Wright AJ (1987) Covariance of inbred relatives with special reference to selfing. Genetics 115, 545–552.
| PubMed |
open url image1