Dataset Information

Nonadditive indirect effects of group genetic diversity on larval viability in Drosophila melanogaster imply key role of maternal decision-making.

ABSTRACT: Genetic variation can have important consequences for populations: high population genetic diversity is typically associated with ecological success. Some mechanisms that account for these benefits assume that local social groups with high genetic diversity are more successful than low-diversity groups. At the same time, active decision-making by individuals can influence group genetic diversity. Here, we examine how maternal decisions that determine group genetic diversity influence the viability of Drosophila melanogaster larvae. Our groups contained wild-type larvae, whose genetic diversity we manipulated, and genetically marked 'tester' larvae, whose genotype and frequency were identical in all trials. We measured wild-type and tester viability for each group. Surprisingly, the viability of wild-type larvae was neither augmented nor reduced when group genetic diversity was altered. However, the viability of the tester genotype was substantially depressed in large, high-diversity groups. Further, not all high-diversity groups produced this effect: certain combinations of wild-type genotypes were deleterious to tester viability, while other groups of the same diversity-but containing different wild-type genotypes-were not deleterious. These deleterious combinations of wild-type genotypes could not be predicted by observing the performance of the same tester and wild-type genotypes in low-diversity groups. Taken together, these results suggest that nonadditive interactions among genotypes, rather than genetic diversity per se, account for between-group differences in viability in D. melanogaster and that predicting the consequences of genetic diversity at the population level may not be straightforward.

SUBMITTER: Saltz JB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3531796 | biostudies-literature | 2012 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Nonadditive indirect effects of group genetic diversity on larval viability in Drosophila melanogaster imply key role of maternal decision-making.

Saltz Julia B JB Alicuben Evan T ET Grubman Jessica J Harkenrider Matthew M Megowan Nichelle N Nuzhdin Sergey V SV

Molecular ecology 20120308 9

Genetic variation can have important consequences for populations: high population genetic diversity is typically associated with ecological success. Some mechanisms that account for these benefits assume that local social groups with high genetic diversity are more successful than low-diversity groups. At the same time, active decision-making by individuals can influence group genetic diversity. Here, we examine how maternal decisions that determine group genetic diversity influence the viabili ...[more]

PMID: 22404740

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo (1) provide an up-to-date overview of shared decision making (SDM)-models, (2) give insight in the prominence of components present in SDM-models, (3) describe who is identified as responsible within the components (patient, healthcare professional, both, none), (4) show the occurrence of SDM-components over time, and (5) present an SDM-map to identify SDM-components seen as key, per healthcare setting.DesignSystematic review.Eligibility criteriaPeer-reviewed articles in English presenting a new or adapted model of SDM.Information sourcesAcademic Search Premier, Cochrane, Embase, Emcare, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science were systematically searched for articles published up to and including September 2, 2019.ResultsForty articles were included, each describing a unique SDM-model. Twelve models were generic, the others were specific to a healthcare setting. Fourteen were based on empirical data, 26 primarily on analytical thinking. Fifty-three different elements were identified and clustered into 24 components. Overall, Describe treatment options was the most prominent component across models. Components present in >50% of models were: Make the decision (75%), Patient preferences (65%), Tailor information (65%), Deliberate (58%), Create choice awareness (55%), and Learn about the patient (53%). In the majority of the models (27/40), both healthcare professional and patient were identified as actors. Over time, Describe treatment options and Make the decision are the two components which are present in most models in any time period. Create choice awareness stood out for being present in a markedly larger proportion of models over time.ConclusionsThis review provides an up-to-date overview of SDM-models, showing that SDM-models quite consistently share some components but that a unified view on what SDM is, is still lacking. Clarity about what SDM constitutes is essential though for implementation, assessment, and research purposes. A map is offered to identify SDM-components seen as key.Trial registrationPROSPERO registration CRD42015019740.

Project description:Background The organ transplantation sector in China is facing a severe shortage of donors, and the organ donation rate needs to be increased. Since 2015, voluntary donation by citizens has become the only source of organs for transplantation in China. In recent years, there has been a relatively positive change in young people's attitudes toward organ donation after death. The aim of the study was to understand young people's perceptions and attitudes toward organ donation and the factors that influence them and can positively impact the promotion of organ donation. Methods By analyzing relevant literature and legal texts, we developed a questionnaire. Information was obtained through questionnaires and interviews, and 501 valid questionnaires were returned from the target group. A chi-square test was used to examine whether there were significant differences in the willingness to organ donation among young people with different characteristics. A factor analysis was used to investigate the main factors influencing the different attitudes of young people toward organ donation, and a one-way ANOVA was used to examine whether young people with different characteristics were affected differently by different factors. Results In our survey of young people aged 18–30 years, 99.2% of respondents knew about organ donation, 47.1% were willing to donate organs, and 15.2% understood that there were corresponding laws and regulations for organ donation. The study's findings showed that urban residents are more willing to be organ donators than rural residents; people with higher education levels have better awareness and are more willing to donate an organ; and people with religious beliefs are more likely to donate organs. The main factors that support the willingness of young people to donate are the social environment that provides support, their optimism in dealing with death, and their desire to realize their final value after death. The main factors for those unwilling to donate were low awareness or misconceptions about organ donation among individuals and their families and their attitudes toward death. As the people who took the questionnaire are probably interested in organ donation, the sample results will show a higher percentage of people who know about organ donation. We hope to discuss further with a larger and broader sample coverage to improve the estimates' validity and reflect the overall picture more accurately in a future study. Conclusion Young people knew about organ donation but had a low depth of awareness. Household registration type, education level, and religious affiliation significantly correlate with people's willingness to donate. The supportive environment for organ donation in society and the correct understanding of the organ donation process and laws and regulations can influence people's willingness to donate.

Project description:BACKGROUND:In the last 20 years, the chances for intact survival for extremely preterm infants have increased in high income countries. Decisions about withholding or withdrawing intensive care remain a major challenge in infants born at the limits of viability. Shared decision-making regarding these fragile infants between health care professionals and parents has become the preferred model today. However, there is an ongoing ethical debate on how decisions regarding life-sustaining treatment should be reached and who should have the final word when health care professionals and parents do not agree. We designed a survey among neonatologists and neonatal nurses to analyze practices, difficulties and parental involvement in end-of-life decisions for extremely preterm infants. METHODS:All 552 physicians and nurses with at least 12 months work experience in level III neonatal intensive care units (NICU) in Switzerland were invited to participate in an online survey with 50 questions. Differences between neonatologists and NICU nurses and between language regions were explored. RESULTS:Ninety six of 121 (79%) physicians and 302 of 431(70%) nurses completed the online questionnaire. The following difficulties with end-of-life decision-making were reported more frequently by nurses than physicians: insufficient time for decision-making, legal constraints and lack of consistent unit policies. Nurses also mentioned a lack of solidarity in our society and shortage of services for disabled more often than physicians. In the context of limiting intensive care in selected circumstances, nurses considered withholding tube feedings and respiratory support less acceptable than physicians. Nurses were more reluctant to give parents full authority to decide on the course of action for their infant. In contrast to professional category (nurse or physician), language region, professional experience and religion had little influence if any on the answers given. CONCLUSIONS:Physicians and nurses differ in many aspects of how and by whom end-of-life decisions should be made in extremely preterm infants. The divergencies between nurses and physicians may be due to differences in ethics education, varying focus in patient care and direct exposure to the patients. Acknowledging these differences is important to avoid potential conflicts within the neonatal team but also with parents in the process of end-of-life decision-making in preterm infants born at the limits of viability.

Dataset Information

Nonadditive indirect effects of group genetic diversity on larval viability in Drosophila melanogaster imply key role of maternal decision-making.

Publications

Nonadditive indirect effects of group genetic diversity on larval viability in Drosophila melanogaster imply key role of maternal decision-making.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets