Heterozygosity-fitness correlations in zebra finches: microsatellite markers can be better than their reputation

Forstmeier W, Schielzeth H, Mueller JC, Ellegren H, Kempenaers B (2012)
Molecular Ecology 21(13): 3237-3249.

Journal Article | Published | English

No fulltext has been uploaded

Author
; ; ; ;
Abstract
Numerous studies have reported associations between heterozygosity in microsatellite markers and fitness-related traits (heterozygosity–fitness correlations, HFCs). However,it has often been questioned whether HFCs reflect general inbreeding depression, because a small panel of microsatellite markers does not reflect very well an individual’s inbreeding coefficient (F) as calculated from a pedigree. Here, we challenge this prevailing view. Because of chance events during Mendelian segregation, an individual’s realized proportion of the genome that is identical by descent (IBD) may substantially deviate from the pedigree-based expectation (i.e. F). This Mendelian noise may result in a weak correlation between F and multi-locus heterozygosity, but this does not imply that multi-locus heterozygosity is a bad estimator of realized IBD. We examined correlations between 11 fitness-related traits measured in up to 1192 captive zebra finches and three measures of inbreeding: (i) heterozygosity across 11 microsatellite markers, (ii) heterozygosity across 1359 single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers and (iii) F, based on a 5th-generation pedigree. All 11 phenotypic traits showed positive relationships with measures of heterozygosity, especially traits that are most closely related to fitness. Remarkably, the small panel of microsatellite markers produced equally strong HFCs as the large panel of SNP markers. Both marker-based approaches produced stronger correlations with phenotypes than the pedigree-based F, and this did not seem to result from the shortness of our pedigree. We argue that a small panel of microsatellites with high allelic richness may better reflect an individual’s realized IBD than previously appreciated, especially in species like the zebra finch, where much of the genome is inherited in large blocks that rarely experience cross-over during meiosis.
Publishing Year
ISSN
PUB-ID

Cite this

Forstmeier W, Schielzeth H, Mueller JC, Ellegren H, Kempenaers B. Heterozygosity-fitness correlations in zebra finches: microsatellite markers can be better than their reputation. Molecular Ecology. 2012;21(13):3237-3249.
Forstmeier, W., Schielzeth, H., Mueller, J. C., Ellegren, H., & Kempenaers, B. (2012). Heterozygosity-fitness correlations in zebra finches: microsatellite markers can be better than their reputation. Molecular Ecology, 21(13), 3237-3249.
Forstmeier, W., Schielzeth, H., Mueller, J. C., Ellegren, H., and Kempenaers, B. (2012). Heterozygosity-fitness correlations in zebra finches: microsatellite markers can be better than their reputation. Molecular Ecology 21, 3237-3249.
Forstmeier, W., et al., 2012. Heterozygosity-fitness correlations in zebra finches: microsatellite markers can be better than their reputation. Molecular Ecology, 21(13), p 3237-3249.
W. Forstmeier, et al., “Heterozygosity-fitness correlations in zebra finches: microsatellite markers can be better than their reputation”, Molecular Ecology, vol. 21, 2012, pp. 3237-3249.
Forstmeier, W., Schielzeth, H., Mueller, J.C., Ellegren, H., Kempenaers, B.: Heterozygosity-fitness correlations in zebra finches: microsatellite markers can be better than their reputation. Molecular Ecology. 21, 3237-3249 (2012).
Forstmeier, W., Schielzeth, Holger, Mueller, J. C., Ellegren, H., and Kempenaers, B. “Heterozygosity-fitness correlations in zebra finches: microsatellite markers can be better than their reputation”. Molecular Ecology 21.13 (2012): 3237-3249.
This data publication is cited in the following publications:
This publication cites the following data publications:
2639475
Data from: Heterozygosity-fitness correlations in zebra finches: microsatellite markers can be better than their reputation
Forstmeier W, Schielzeth H, Mueller J, Ellegren H, Kempenaers B (2012)
Dryad Digital Repository.

40 Citations in Europe PMC

Data provided by Europe PubMed Central.

Spatial Isolation and Temporal Variation in Fitness and Condition Facilitate Divergence in a Migratory Divide.
Hermes C, Mettler R, Santiago-Alarcon D, Segelbacher G, Schaefer HM., PLoS ONE 10(12), 2015
PMID: 26656955
Context-dependent associations between heterozygosity and immune variation in a wild carnivore.
Brock PM, Goodman SJ, Hall AJ, Cruz M, Acevedo-Whitehouse K., BMC Evol. Biol. 15(), 2015
PMID: 26537228
Differential effects of genetic vs. environmental quality in Drosophila melanogaster suggest multiple forms of condition dependence.
Bonduriansky R, Mallet MA, Arbuthnott D, Pawlowsky-Glahn V, Egozcue JJ, Rundle HD., Ecol. Lett. 18(4), 2015
PMID: 25649176
Heterozygosity-fitness correlations in a declining seabird population.
Velando A, Barros A, Moran P., Mol. Ecol. 24(5), 2015
PMID: 25626726
Reduced microsatellite heterozygosity does not affect natal dispersal in three contrasting roe deer populations.
Vanpe C, Debeffe L, Hewison AJ, Quemere E, Lemaitre JF, Galan M, Amblard B, Klein F, Cargnelutti B, Capron G, Merlet J, Warnant C, Gaillard JM., Oecologia 177(3), 2015
PMID: 25388875
Investigation of individual heterozygosity correlated to growth traits in Tongshan Black-boned goat.
Han YG, Liu GQ, Jiang XP, Liang GM, He CB, Wang DW, Wu Y, Xiang XL, Hu J, Peng YQ., Mol. Biol. Rep. 40(11), 2013
PMID: 24057243
Has the inbreeding load for a condition-dependent sexual signalling trait been purged in insular lizard populations?
Runemark A, Hansson B, Ljungqvist M, Brydegaard M, Svensson EI., Mol. Ecol. 22(5), 2013
PMID: 23294127

46 References

Data provided by Europe PubMed Central.


Kinghorn, 2010
Research on inbreeding in the 'omic' era.
Kristensen TN, Pedersen KS, Vermeulen CJ, Loeschcke V., Trends Ecol. Evol. (Amst.) 25(1), 2010
PMID: 19733933
Estimation of the inbreeding coefficient through use of genomic data.
Leutenegger AL, Prum B, Genin E, Verny C, Lemainque A, Clerget-Darpoux F, Thompson EA., Am. J. Hum. Genet. 73(3), 2003
PMID: 12900793
Neutral locus heterozygosity, inbreeding, and survival in Darwin's ground finches (Geospiza fortis and G. scandens).
Markert JA, Grant PR, Grant BR, Keller LF, Coombs JL, Petren K., Heredity (Edinb) 92(4), 2004
PMID: 14735140
Measuring inbreeding depression in the wild: the old ways are the best.
Pemberton J., Trends Ecol. Evol. (Amst.) 19(12), 2004
PMID: 16701322
Wild pedigrees: the way forward
Pemberton, Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 275(), 2008

R, 2011
GENEPOP (version 1.2): population genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism
Raymond, Journal of Heredity 86(), 1995
Heritability of and early environment effects on variation in mating preferences.
Schielzeth H, Bolund E, Forstmeier W., Evolution 64(4), 2010
PMID: 19895552
QTL linkage mapping of zebra finch beak colour shows an oligogenic control of a sexually selected trait
Schielzeth, Evolution 68(), 2012
Understanding the relationship between the inbreeding coefficient and multilocus heterozygosity: theoretical expectations and empirical data.
Slate J, David P, Dodds KG, Veenvliet BA, Glass BC, Broad TE, McEwan JC., Heredity (Edinb) 93(3), 2004
PMID: 15254488
How many SNPs are enough?
Smouse PE., Mol. Ecol. 19(7), 2010
PMID: 20456228

Sokal, 1995
The distribution of the fraction of the genome identical by descent in finite random mating populations
Stam, Genetical Research 35(), 1980
Inbreeding coefficient and heterozygosity-fitness correlations in unhatched and hatched song sparrow nestmates.
Taylor SS, Sardell RJ, Reid JM, Bucher T, Taylor NG, Arcese P, Keller LF., Mol. Ecol. 19(20), 2010
PMID: 20854411
Heterosis, marker mutational processes and population inbreeding history.
Tsitrone A, Rousset F, David P., Genetics 159(4), 2001
PMID: 11779819
Developmental stress and female mate choice behaviour in the zebra finch
Woodgate, Animal Behaviour 79(), 2010

Zann, 1996

Export

0 Marked Publications

Open Data PUB

Web of Science

View record in Web of Science®

Sources

PMID: 22554318
PubMed | Europe PMC

Search this title in

Google Scholar