↓ Skip to main content

Parasite mediated homogenizing selection at the MHC in guppies

Overview of attention for article published in Genetica, August 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Parasite mediated homogenizing selection at the MHC in guppies
Published in
Genetica, August 2009
DOI 10.1007/s10709-009-9402-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bonnie A. Fraser, Bryan D. Neff

Abstract

Understanding the selective forces influencing genetic diversity is a fundamental goal of evolutionary ecology. The genes of the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) play a key role in the adaptive immune response of vertebrates and thus provide an excellent opportunity to examine the agents of selection on a functionally important gene. Here we examine the genetic architecture of the MHC class IIB genes in 10 wild populations of guppies (Poecilia reticulata) in Northern Trinidad. We have previously shown that these populations are significantly less diverged at the class IIB locus than expected based on neutral (microsatellite) loci. We now survey infection by Gyrodactylus turnbulli and G. bullatarudis, common parasitic worms that infect guppies, as a potential agent of homogenizing selection. We used a genetic algorithm to partition both additive and non-additive genetic effects of the five most common MHC allele types as well as a rare allele category. Although we found no evidence for non-additive effects, across the populations we found that one allele type (the a-type) had a significant negative additive effect on parasite load. Thus, individuals who had more copies of the a-type allele were infected with fewer gyrodactylus than individuals with fewer copies of the allele. These results not only link parasite infection with MHC genotype, they provide a mechanism of homogenizing selection across these otherwise disparate populations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 3 3%
United States 2 2%
Australia 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 91 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 34%
Researcher 18 18%
Student > Master 16 16%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 4%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 8 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 76 76%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 6%
Environmental Science 4 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 2%
Mathematics 1 1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 9 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 January 2013.
All research outputs
#15,260,208
of 22,691,736 outputs
Outputs from Genetica
#476
of 713 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,723
of 90,670 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetica
#5
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,691,736 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 713 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 90,670 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.