In a lab experiment we examined the evolutionary effects effects of genetic stress: a harmful recessive mutation (nub E and nub X)that was experimentally introduced into a population of flies hundreds of years ago. The goals were to assess the impact of nub on juvenile fitness, the impact of nub on adult fitness and to assess the degree of compensatory evolution in the evolved wingless population. We compared two populations with one another (nub E and nub X) and with a base population for reference. What could be wrong with this experiment? Could other genetic mechanisms played a role in the differentiation of these populations? If so, how could this have been made a better experiment?
I am making some assumptions based on the information in the problem. If any of these are not correct, or if there is any additional information, please take that into account. I am assuming that nub E and nub X are both harmful mutations when compared with a wild-type population and that the nub mutations leads to wingless adults.
<br>1. What could be wrong with this experiment? Could other genetic mechanisms have played a role in the differentiation of the populations?
<br>a. In any evolutionary process, you need to consider that no population is ever static and unchanging. Therefore, your base population is not really a "control" or reference because it too has been changing for hundreds of years. This will make it more difficult to evaluate compensatory ...
The mutation and the experimental evolution of fitness are given. The role in the differentiation of populations is examined.