Piebald rats and selection : $b An experimental test of the effectiveness of selection and of the theory of gametic purity in Mendelian crosses — John Shaqi
Piebald rats and selection : $b An experimental test of the effectiveness of selection and of the theory of gametic purity in Mendelian crossesCastle, William E. (William Ernest)
Science
Piebald rats and selection : $b An experimental test of the effectiveness of selection and of the theory of gametic purity in Mendelian crosses
Castle, William E. (William Ernest)
Heredity
During the year 1906-7 the young rats were graded by the method used by
MacCurdy and Castle (1907) that is, the back-stripe was measured and a
calculation made of the percentage of the dorsal surface posterior to the
hood which was pigmented. But on account of the irregular outline of the
back-stripe in many individuals the method of measurement was found to
be at best a rough one, as well as extremely laborious. Accordingly in
the summer of 1907 a set of arbitrary grades was adopted, which is shown
at the top of Plate 1. Each young rat was classed in that grade which it
most nearly approached in amount of pigmentation. Skins of rats graded
from -3¼ to +4¾ are shown in the middle and lower rows of Plate 1. The
grading was done when the rats were about three or four weeks old, at
which time selected individuals were reserved as the parents for a later
generation, the remainder being discarded. This method has been followed
ever since its adoption and the data thus obtained are summarized in the
tables, which cover the breeding operations of a little more than six
years, 1907-1913.
The grouping of the young in a series of generations is only
approximately accurate, for practical considerations have often led us
to mate together animals which belonged to different generations of
offspring. When, for example, an animal of generation 2 was mated with
one of generation 4, the question would arise: To what generation do the
offspring belong? In deciding this question we simply added one to the
mean of the generations to which the respective parents belonged. In the
foregoing case this would be (2 + 4)/2 + 1 = 4.
In case one parent belonged to generation 2 and the other to generation
3, a fractional result would be obtained, thus (2 + 3)/2 + 1 = 3½. In
making up the summaries of the generations as given in the tables,
offspring like the foregoing, of generation 3½, were divided equally
between generations 3 and 4, alternate litters of young as recorded in
the ledger being assigned to each. Offspring belonging to generations 2¾
and 3¼ were tabulated in generation 3; those belonging to generations
3¾ and 4¼ were tabulated in generation 4, etc. While, therefore, the
generations as tabulated overlap, it is clear that they include groups
of offspring of selected parents each the result of _one additional
selection over the preceding group._
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account