1/45
Looks like no tags are added yet.
Name | Mastery | Learn | Test | Matching | Spaced | Call with Kai | Chat |
|---|
No analytics yet
Send a link to your students to track their progress
Population
difference between an Individual Cross and a Population Cross on a Punnett square
An individual cross uses single-gamete probabilities along the axes (1/2$ and 1/2) to calculate specific offspring genotype probabilities (1/4). A population cross places entire allele frequencies along the axes (0.89 and 0.11) to directly calculate overall population genotype frequencies.
assumption is required to calculate genotype frequencies using a population cross
It explicitly assumes random mating across the entire population.
Pacific Northwest Indigenous peoples observed that spring and fall Chinook runs in the same river were completely distinct populations requiring different ecological management.
spring and fall run Chinook salmon have distinct genetic differences, specifically at the GREB1L gene, leading to new ecological protections and dam removals.
Genotype Frequency
The relative abundance or proportion of a specific genotype within a population (the number of 'BB')
Genotype Frequency Formula
Allele Frequency
The relative abundance or proportion of a specific allele at a genetic locus within a population. proportion of alleles that are B
Allele Frequency Formula
Importance of Genetic Variation
the raw material required for all evolutionary change, without it, a population cannot evolve regardless of the underlying evolutionary mechanism.
Three Conditions for Evolution by Natural Selection
Phenotypic variation must exist in the population; 2. The variation must be heritable; 3. The variation must lead to differences in fitness (differential survival or reproductive success).
Mechanisms of Evolution
Selection; 2. Migration (gene flow); 3. Random changes in allele frequency (genetic drift); 4. Mutation.
Hardy and Weinberg focus
what will happened to a single trait, as a single genetic locus that is encoded by two alleles in the Absence if evolution
1. No mutation 2. No gene flow (migration) 3. Infinitely large population (no genetic drift) 4. No natural selection; 5. Random mating.
No mutation
single locus with two alleles does not change state between generation
No gene flow
Alleles are neither added not removed from the population
Population is infinitely large
random events and processes thus have no effect on the genetic diversity of the population
Natural selection does not affect the gene in question
the two alleles at the locus do not differentially affect survival or reproduction
Individuals mate randomly
regardless of their genotype at the locus of interest, individuals in the same population all have the same reproductive fitness
Genetic Outcome of Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium
Genetic variation is maintained at a constant level, and allele frequencies come into equilibrium within a single generation and will not change from generation to generation. not evolving
Apply Hardy-Weinberg as a Null Hypothesis
Note observed genotype frequencies; 2. Calculate allele frequencies (p and q); 3. Calculate expected genotype frequencies using p², 2pq, and q²; 4. Compare observed vs. expected values using a statistical test or margin of error.
Departure from Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium Indicates
0.48. If f(A) = p = 0.6, then f(a) = q = 1 - 0.6 = 0.4. The frequency of the heterozygous Aa genotype/phenotype under HWE is 2pq = 2(0.6)(0.4) = 0.48
no. (Observed frequencies: f(AA) = 0.465, f(Aa) = 0.204, f(aa) = 0.331. Allele frequencies: p = 0.465 + 0.102 = 0.567; q = 0.433. Expected frequencies under HWE: p^2 \approx 0.321, 2pq =0.491, q^2 = 0.187. The observed heterozygotes (0.204) drastically deviate from the expected value of 0.491, exceeding the typical 5% margin of error).
0.603 (or 0.60). Calculated as: [2(113) + 150] / [2(312)] = 376 / 624 = 0.60256...
yes. (The observed genotype frequencies are f(AA) = 0.362, f(Aa) = 0.481, and f(aa) = 0.157[cite: 846]. The expected genotype frequencies calculated from your allele frequencies are p² = 0.364, 2pq = 0.479, and q² = 0.158[cite: 805, 834, 835, 836]. Because the observed values match the expected baseline almost perfectly, they fall well within the 5% margin of error
Why is Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium useful?
It provides a null hypothesis for comparison.
The locus A has two alleles: A and a. The frequency of A is 0.6. What is the frequency of the Aa phenotype?
0.48. If f(A) = p = 0.6 , then f(a) = q = 1 - 0.6 = 0.4. The frequency of the heterozygous Aa genotype/phenotype under HWE is 2pq = 2(0.6)(0.4) = 0.48
What best describes Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium?
Allele frequencies remain constant when specific assumptions are met.
A population of 447 individuals is comprised of 208 individuals homozygous for one allele, 91 heterozygous individuals, and 148 individuals homozygous for the other allele. There are only two alleles at the locus in question. Is this population in Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium?
no. (Observed frequencies: f(AA) = 0.465, f(Aa) = 0.204, f(aa) = 0.331. Allele frequencies: p = 0.567; q = 0.433. Expected frequencies under HWE: p^2 = 0.321, 2pq =0.491, q^2 = 0.187. The observed heterozygotes drastically deviate from the expected value).
A population of 312 flowering plants has the following genotype counts: AA - 113, Aa - 150, aa - 49. (a) Calculate the observed frequency for the dominant allele (p). 0.603 (or 0.60).
[2(113) + 150] / [2(312)] = 376 / 624 = 0.60256...
A population of 312 flowering plants has the following genotype counts: AA - 113, Aa - 150, aa - 49. (b) What is the expected frequency for the aa genotype?
0.158 (or 0.16). If p = 0.603, then q = 1 - 0.603 = 0.397. The expected frequency of aa is q^2 = (0.397)^2 = 0.1576
A population of 312 flowering plants has the following genotype counts: AA - 113, Aa - 150, aa - 49. (c) Is this population at HWE? [Answer 'yes' or 'no']
yes. (The observed genotype frequencies are f(AA) = 0.362, f(Aa) = 0.481, and f(aa) = 0.157. The expected genotype frequencies calculated from your allele frequencies are p² = 0.364, 2pq = 0.479, and q² = 0.158. Because the observed values match the expected baseline almost perfectly, they fall well within the 5% margin of error).