A genetic tool to manipulate litter size

Frontiers in Zoology

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2014, Pages

  Ferrari, Manuela ^a   Lindholm, Anna K ^a   König, Barbara ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

House mouse; Litter size manipulation; Optimal litter size; T haplotype

Indexed keywords

EUTHERIA; MAMMALIA; MUS MUSCULUS;

EID: 84897638206     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17429994     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1742-9994-11-18     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Pianka ER. Natural selection of optimal reproductive tactics. Am Zool 1976, 16(4):775-784.
2. Godfray HCJ, Partridge L, Harvey PH. Clutch size. Ann Rev Ecol Systematics 1991, 22(1):409-429.
3. Lack D. The significance of clutch-size. Ibis 1947, 89(2):302-352.
4. Williams GC. Natural selection, the costs of reproduction, and a refinement of lack's principle. Am Nat 1966, 100(916):687-690.
5. Stearns SC. The evolution of life histories 1992, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
6. Styrsky JN, Brawn JD, Robinson SK. Juvenile mortality increases with clutch size in a neotropical bird. Ecology 2005, 86(12):3238-3244.
7. Roskaft E. The effect of enlarged brood size on the future reproductive potential of the rook. J Anim Ecol 1985, 54(1):255-260.
8. Werf EV. Lack's clutch size hypothesis: an examination of the evidence using meta-analysis. Ecology 1992, 73(5):1699-1705.
9. Sikes RS, Ylönen H. Considerations of optimal litter size in mammals. Oikos 1998, 83(3):452-465.
10. Aubret F, Bonnet X, Shine R, Maumelat S. Clutch size manipulation, hatching success and offspring phenotype in the ball python ( Python regius ). Biol J Linnean Soc 2003, 78(2):263-272.
11. Hardy ICW, Griffiths NT, Godfray HCJ. Clutch size in a parasitoid wasp: a manipulation experiment. J Anim Ecol 1992, 61(1):121-129.
12. Fleming TH, Rauscher RJ. On the evolution of litter size in Peromyscus leucopus Evolution 1978, 32(1):45-55.
13. Koskela E. Offspring growth, survival and reproductive success in the bank vole: a litter size manipulation experiment. Oecologia 1998, 115(3):379-384.
14. Mappes T, Koskela E, Ylonen H. Reproductive costs and litter size in the bank vole. Proc R Soc London. Series B: Biol Sci 1995, 261(1360):19-24.
15. Fuchs S. Optimality of parental investment: the influence of nursing on reproductive success of mother and female young house mice. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 1982, 10(1):39-51.
16. Hare JF, Murie JO. Manipulation of litter size reveals no cost of reproduction in columbian ground squirrels. J Mammal 1992, 73(2):449-454.
17. Sikes RS. Tradeoffs between quality of offspring and litter size: differences do not persist into adulthood. J Mammal 1998, 79(4):1143-1151.
18. Jameson EWJ. Prepartum mammogenesis, milk production, and optimal litter size. Oecologia 1998, 114(2):288-291.
19. Monaghan P, Nager RG, Houston DC. The price of eggs: increased investment in egg production reduces the offspring rearing capacity of parents. Proc R Soc London. Series B: Biol Sci 1998, 265(1407):1731-1735.
20. Speakman JR, McQueenie J. Limits to sustained metabolic rate: the link between food intake, basal metabolic rate, and morphology in reproducing mice, Mus musculus Physiol Zool 1996, 69(4):746-769.
21. Migula P. Bioenergetics of pregnancy and lactation in european common vole. Acta Theriol 1969, 14(13):167-179.
22. Hayden TJ, Thomas CR, Smith SV, Forsyth IA. Placental lactogen in the goat in relation to stage of gestation, number of fetuses, metabolites, progesterone and the time of day. J Endocrinol 1980, 86(2):279-290. 10.1677/joe.0.0860279, 7430893.
23. Hayden TJ, Thomas CR, Forsyth IA. Effect of number of young born (litter size) on milk yield of goats role for placental lactogen. J Dairy Sci 1979, 62(1):53-57. 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(79)83201-4, 457977.
24. Manalu W, Sumaryadi MY, Kusumorini N. Effect of fetal number on the concentrations of circulating maternal serum progesterone and estradiol of does during late pregnancy. Small Ruminant Res 1997, 23(2-3):117-124.
25. Soares M, Talamantes F. Genetic and litter size effects on serum placental lactogen in the mouse. Biol Reprod 1983, 29(1):165-171. 10.1095/biolreprod29.1.165, 6615962.
26. Rattray PV, Garrett WN, East NE, Hinman N. Growth, development and composition of the ovine conceptus and mammary gland during pregnancy. J Anim Sci 1974, 38(3):613-626.
27. Knight CH. Mammary development in mice: effects of hemihysterectomy in pregnancy and of litter size post partum. J Physiol 1982, 327(1):17. 1225093, 6181249.
28. Duah OA, Monney KA, Hambly C, Król E, Speakman JR. Limits to sustained energy intake. xvii. lactation performance in mf1 mice is not programmed by fetal number during pregnancy. J Exp Biol 2013, 216(12):2339-2348. 10.1242/jeb.078428, 23720803.
29. König B, Riester J, Markl H. Maternal care in house mice ( Mus musculus ): Ii. the energy cost of lactation as a function of litter size. J Zool 1988, 216(2):195-210.
30. Nagasawa H, Yanai R. Quantitative participation of placental mammotropic hormones in mammary development during pregnancy of mice. Endocrinol Jpn 1971, 18(6):507-510. 10.1507/endocrj1954.18.507, 5172581.
31. Kensinger RS, Collier RJ, Bazer FW. Effect of number of conceptuses on maternal mammary development during pregnancy in the pig. Domest Anim Endocrinol 1986, 3(4):237-245.
32. Silver LM. The peculiar journey of a selfish chromosome: mouse t haplotypes and meiotic drive. Trends Genet 1993, 9(7):250-254. 10.1016/0168-9525(93)90090-5, 8379001.
33. Hammer MF, Schimenti J, Silver LM. Evolution of mouse chromosome 17 and the origin of inversions associated with t haplotypes. Proc Nat Acad Sci 1989, 86(9):3261-3265. 10.1073/pnas.86.9.3261, 287110, 2717616.
34. Lenington S, Coopersmith CB, Erhart M. Female preference and variability among t-haplotypes in wild house mice. Am Nat 1994, 143(5):766-784.
35. Safronova LD. Embryonal effects of t-haplotypes in mice. Russ J Dev Biol 2009, 40(1):23-30.
36. Theiler K. The house mouse: Atlas of embryonic developmen 1989, New York: Springer-Verlag.
37. Lindholm AK, Musolf K, Weidt A, König B. Mate choice for genetic compatibility in the house mouse. Ecol Evol 2013, 3(5):1231-1247. 10.1002/ece3.534, 3678478, 23762510.
38. Wilson ED, Edwards R. Parturition and increased litter size in mice after superovulation. J Reprod Fertil 1963, 5(2):179-186. 10.1530/jrf.0.0050179, 14001015.
39. Newton JE, Betts JE, Large RV. Increasing litter size in three breeds of sheep by superovulation. J Agric Sci 1970, 75(2):355-360.
40. Oksanen TA, Koskela E, Mappes T. Hormonal manipulation of offspring number: maternal effort and reproductive costs. Evolution 2002, 56(7):1530-1537.
41. Lenington S, Coopersmith C, Williams J. Genetic basis of mating preferences in wild house mice. Am Zool 1992, 32(1):40-47.
42. Russell WMS, Burch RL, Hume CW. The principles of humane experimental technique 1959, London: Methuen.
43. Burt A, Trivers RL. Genes in conflict: The biology of selfish genetic elements 2006, Harvard: Belknap Press.
44. König B, Lindholm A. The complex social environment of female house mice ( Mus domesticus ). Evolution of the House Mouse 2012, 114-134. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Macholàn M, Baird SJE, Mundlinger P, Piàlek J.
45. R Core Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. 2012, [http://www.R-project.org/], R Core Team.