Skip Navigation

Integrative and Comparative Biology 2005 45(3):475-485; doi:10.1093/icb/45.3.475
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Callahan, H. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

The Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology

Using Artificial Selection to Understand Plastic Plant Phenotypes1

Hilary S. Callahan2,1
1 Barnard College, Columbia University, Department of Biological Sciences, 3009 Broadway, New York, New York 10027

The plasticity of any given trait, which has a genetic basis and which may or may not be adaptive, can intensify or attenuate evolved responses, and can itself evolve in response to selection depending on the scale of spatial or temporal heterogeneity. To investigate the complex function and evolution of plastic traits, an appealing yet challenging approach is assessing responses to artificial selection. Here, I review how artificial selection has been employed to explore four botanical research themes: (1) relationships between plastic and evolved responses to multiple stresses, (2) integration of cellular, leaf-level, and whole-plant responses to altered CO2 concentrations, (3) photomorphogenic and photoperiodic development, both mediated by phytochrome photoreceptors, and (4) the evolution of the pest-induced myrosinase-glucosinolate system in cruciferous plants. These diverse topics are unified not only because they have been studied using artificial selection experiments, but also because they have considered variability in multiple traits affected by multiple factors in the external environment. Limitations of such research include a dearth of long-term studies; a surprising but often logistically necessary omission of control or replicate lines; and numerous issues relating to assessing impacts of inbreeding and drift. In addition to discussing options for circumventing such limitations, I draw attention to strategies for integrating the results of artificial selection studies with progress in functional and evolutionary genomics.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci.Home page
H. S. Callahan, H. Maughan, and U. K. Steiner
Phenotypic Plasticity, Costs of Phenotypes, and Costs of Plasticity: Toward an Integrative View
Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., June 1, 2008; 1133(1): 44 - 66.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Integr. Comp. Biol.Home page
J. G. Swallow and T. Garland Jr.
Selection Experiments as a Tool in Evolutionary and Comparative Physiology: Insights into Complex Traits--an Introduction to the Symposium
Integr. Comp. Biol., June 1, 2005; 45(3): 387 - 390.
[Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.