Quantitative genetics, version 3.0: where have we gone since 1987 and where are we headed?
The last 20 years since the previous World Congress have seen tremendous advancements in quantitative genetics, in large part due to the advancements in genomics, computation, and statistics. One central theme of this last 20 years has been the exploitation of the vast harvest of molecular markers--examples include QTL and association mapping, marker-assisted selection and introgression, scans for loci under selection, and methods to infer degree of coancestry, population membership, and past demographic history. One consequence of this harvest is that phenotyping, rather than genotyping, is now the bottleneck in molecular quantitative genetics studies. Equally important have been advances in statistics, many developed to effectively use this treasure trove of markers. Computational improvements in statistics, and in particular Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods, have facilitated many of these methods, as have significantly improved computational abilities for mixed models. Indeed, one could argue that mixed models have had at least as great an impact in quantitative genetics as have molecular markers. A final important theme over the past 20 years has been the fusion of population and quantitative genetics, in particular the importance of coalescence theory with its applications for association mapping, scans for loci under selection, and estimation of the demography history of a population. What are the future directions of the field? While obviously important surprises await us, the general trend seems to be moving into higher and higher dimensional traits and, in general, dimensional considerations. We have methods to deal with infinite-dimensional traits indexed by a single variable (such as a trait varying over time), but the future will require us to treat much more complex objects, such as infinite-dimensional traits indexed over several variables and with graphs and dynamical networks. A second important direction is the interfacing of quantitative genetics with physiological and developmental models as a step towards both the gene-phenotype map as well as predicting the effects of environmental changes. The high-dimensional objects we will need to consider almost certainly have most of their variation residing on a lower (likely much lower) dimensional subspace, and how to treat these constraints will be an important area of future research. Conversely, the univariate traits we currently deal with are themselves projections of more complex structures onto a lower dimensional space, and simply treating these as univariate traits can result in serious errors in understanding their selection and biology. As a field, our future is quite bright. We have new tools and techniques, and (most importantly) new talent with an exciting international group of vibrant young investigators who have received their degrees since the last Congress. One cloud for concern, however, has been the replacement at many universities of plant and animal breeders with plant and animal molecular biologists. Molecular tools are now an integral part of breeding, but breeding is not an integral part of molecular biology.
Walsh
Bruce
B
Departments of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Animal Sciences, Plant Sciences, Molecular and Cellular Biology, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA. jbwalsh@u.arizona.edu
D000818:Animals; D005823:Genetics / Q000266:history* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data / Q000639:trends*; D005828:Genetics, Population / Q000639:trends; D023281:Genomics / Q000639:trends; D049673:History, 20th Century; D049674:History, 21st Century; D006801:Humans; D008954:Models, Biological; D012099:Reproductive Techniques / Q000639:trends; D013223:Statistics as Topic / Q000639:trends
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1918 Mar;4(3):55-8
16576274
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Feb 4;100(3):1072-7
12538876
Trends Plant Sci. 2004 Sep;9(9):426-32
15337492
J Math Biol. 1989;27(4):429-50
2769086
Genetics. 1990 Jul;125(3):585-97
2116359
Evolution. 1976 Jun;30(2):314-334
28563044
Theor Appl Genet. 1994 Jul;88(5):561-72
24186111
Genetics. 2005 Jul;170(3):1247-59
15911590
Genetics. 1923 Nov;8(6):552-60
17246026
Trends Plant Sci. 2006 Dec;11(12):587-93
17092764
Genome. 1989;31(2):778-83
2632351
Genetics. 2000 Dec;156(4):2043-50
11102394
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2005 Jul 29;360(1459):1411-25
16048784
Am Nat. 2004 Mar;163(3):329-40
15026971
Evolution. 2002 Aug;56(8):1683-95
12353761
Genetics. 2007 Jan;175(1):289-99
17110493
Genetics. 1990 Apr;124(4):979-93
2323560
Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 1955;20:213-24
13433564
Am Nat. 2001 Mar;157(3):245-61
18707288
Evolution. 1983 Nov;37(6):1210-1226
28556011
Evolution. 1979 Mar;33(1Part2):402-416
28568194
J Evol Biol. 2007 Jan;20(1):36-8; discussion 39-44
17209996
Curr Biol. 2007 Mar 20;17(6):528-32
17306541
Genetics. 2007 Jan;175(1):277-88
17110494
Genetica. 2001;112-113:199-222
11838766
Genetics. 1996 Sep;144(1):205-13
8878686
Evolution. 1992 Aug;46(4):954-971
28564407
Evolution. 1992 Apr;46(2):390-411
28564020
Aust J Biol Sci. 1967 Feb;20(1):127-39
6034339