© 2004 The American Genetic Association
Pleiotropy, Epistasis and New QTL: The Genetic Architecture of Honey Bee Foraging Behavior
From the Department of Biology, University of North Carolina, Greensboro, 107 Eberhart Building, P.O. Box 26170, Greensboro, NC 27402 (Rüppell); the Department of Entomology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843 (Pankiw); and School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, P.O. Box 874501, Tempe, AZ 85287 (Page)
Address correspondence to R. E. Page and the address above, or e-mail: repage{at}asu.edu.
The regulation of division of labor in social insects, particularly in the honey bee (Apis mellifera L.), has received considerable attention from a number of biological subdisciplines, including quantitative and behavioral genetics, because of the high complexity of the behavioral traits involved. The foraging choices of honey bee workers can be accurately quantified, and previous studies have made the foraging behavior of honey bees one of the best studied naturally occurring behavioral phenotypes. Three quantitative trait loci (QTL) have been identified that influence a set of foraging variables, including the concentration of nectar collected and the amount of pollen and nectar brought back to the hive. This study extends previous genetic investigations and represents the most comprehensive investigation of the genetic architecture of these foraging variables. We examined the effects of markers for the three established QTL and for one further candidate gene (Amfor), in two reciprocal backcross populations. These populations were also used to carry out two new QTL mapping studies, with over 400 Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism (AFLP®) markers in each. We detected a variety of effects of the genetic markers for the established QTL and the candidate gene, which were mostly epistatic in nature. A few new QTL could be detected with a variety of mapping techniques. Our results add complexity to the genetic architecture of the foraging behavior of the honey bee. Specifically, we support the hypotheses that pln1, pln2, pln3, and Amfor are involved in the regulation of foraging behavior in the honey bee and add some new factors that deserve further study in the future.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  T. A. Linksvayer, O. Rueppell, A. Siegel, O. Kaftanoglu, R. E. Page Jr., and G. V. Amdam The Genetic Basis of Transgressive Ovary Size in Honeybee Workers Genetics, October 1, 2009; 183(2): 693 - 707. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Waibel, D. Floreano, S. Magnenat, and L. Keller Division of labour and colony efficiency in social insects: effects of interactions between genetic architecture, colony kin structure and rate of perturbations Proc R Soc B, July 22, 2006; 273(1595): 1815 - 1823. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
O. Rueppell, S. B. C. Chandra, T. Pankiw, M. K. Fondrk, M. Beye, G. Hunt, and R. E. Page The Genetic Architecture of Sucrose Responsiveness in the Honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) Genetics, January 1, 2006; 172(1): 243 - 251. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|