Feeds:
Posts
Comments

BAPG schedule

BAPG schedule.

BAPG @ DAVIS!!!!

gcbias

The Coop Lab will be hosting the sixth Bay area population genomics (BAPG) meeting at UC Davis on May 26th. This is a great informal meeting 2-3 times a year of the Bay area evolutionary and population geneticists. The signup sheet for the sixth Bay area population genomics meeting at UC Davis is here http://tinyurl.com/72wd9xr. Details below. Please signup to give talks and posters, as this offers a great opportunity to present your work to a friendly audience of fellow evolutionary and population geneticists. Details below.

Best wishes,
Yaniv Brandvain, Alisa Sedghifar, Peter Ralph, Jeremy Berg, Graham Coop


BAPG VI: May 26, 2012

Venue
1322 Storer Hall (map: http://campusmap.ucdavis.edu/?b=145 ), UC Davis

Tentative Schedule:

9:00-10:00 – Morning reception and poster set-up, Coffee, and snacks provided
10:00-11:00 – Talks
11:00-11:30 – break
11:30-12:30 – Talks
12:30-1:30 – Lunch and Poster session
1:30-2:30 – Talks
2:30-4:00 – Hangin out

Tentative talk format:…

View original post 156 more words

gcbias

[Kummerspeck: literally grief bacon in German. The excess weight gained from from over eating.]

In the Coop lab we’ll be piling on the kummerspeck due to our sadness at Torsten leaving the lab to return to Germany.

For the past 6 months we’ve been hosting Torsten Gunther a PhD student from Hohenheim. Torsten has been working on a variety of projects on detecting adaptation and gene flow in A. thaliana during his time with us. One of his projects has been to extend Bayenv to more robustly identify local adaptation through environmental correlations, we hope to have that program and a paper out shortly.

It’s been really great fun having Torsten in the lab – both scientifically and socially – and we’ll miss him hugely. (Yaniv and he had a running argument over who ate the last of the cookies and cakes, and Torsten was constantly amazed about…

View original post 79 more words

Looking to spruce up both my actual and virtual homes, I was cruising through sally harless’ blog late one night. In her post, ‘things i am obsessed with‘, sally pointed out some work by elly mackay [website, blog]. I thought elly’s work was awesome, and purchased two pictures for my house (right).

elly kindly gave me permission to share her work on my site. So, if you see a new or unfamiliar image in my header above, relax and enjoy. If you like it, do check out elly’s website.

Her work/process is super cool. In brief, she cuts out small pieces of plastic paper, and then she colors, bends, and arranges them into amazing images. Next, she puts them in a small ‘theater’ to hold all of the paper together, and takes pictures of her work under differing light conditions, giving the similar creations very different feels (Compare the lively, springtime picture below, to the warm, autumnal image above).

Thanks elly mackay

Here’s a picture of elly setting up the theater (super cool)

Graham and I have a new paper coming out in Genetics, in which we examine the potential role of sex-specific meiotic drive in the evolution of recombination (especially sex differences in recombination). Here’s a link to Graham’s entertaining blog entry describing our paper, and more broadly, the role of genetic conflicts in the evolution of meiosis.

Conflict is everywhere during sexual reproduction. Even meiosis is a battlefield (Pat Benatar had that right), as during meiosis and gametogenesis alleles can complete with each other within an individual to ensure their transmission to the next generation. No where is this more apparent than during female meiosis, where out of the 4 products of meiosis only one will go on to form the egg. This allows an opportunity for (true) meiotic drive, as an allele that distort meiosis in its favor when heterozygous can spread through the population. One great example of female meiotic drive is the chromosome knob system in maize (see here and references within), another putative example is provided by the great work of Fishman and Willis in Mimulus (here and here). There’s even female meiotic drive alleles humans, by chromosomal fusions, but the deleterious consequences in males mean that they only persist for short time periods…. more

gcbias: Scrambling eggs toasts meiotic drive.

Although I study conflict, I like to avoid it in real life, and  in my professional work. However, I recently had a small dispute over a recent paper of mine. In brief, Phil Hedrick considered it incorrect to discuss ‘inbreeding’ at haploid, uni-parentally inherited loci. Here I briefly review my original paper, Hedrick’s comment, and our response. On the whole I think the debate was fun, although I’d rather be doing science than nitpicking about words, it is important that scientists form a common language to best communicate with one another and the greater community.

Mother’s curse – or ‘What’s in it for a mitochondrion in a male’: Since anything that is strictly inherited maternally is never transmitted by males, it seems like mitochondrial influences male fitness should be invisible to selection. This has been called ‘Mother’s curse’ by Gemmell et al, and Frank and Hurst argued that it may explain some diseases that preferentially strike males and may involve the mitochondria (e.g. Leber’s hereditary optic neuropathy).

Reversing Mother’s curse: The idea of mothers’ curse seems compelling, but my graduate co-advisor, Mike Wade and I thought that some proceses could reverse mother’s curse. Specifically, we argued that when maternal sibs depend on each other for help (i.e. kin selection) or mating (i.e. inbreeding)  the success of a mitochondria in a female may depend on her brother. We argued that this indirect selection could act to maintain mitochondrial which function well in males. At the same time my friend, Rob Unckless and his collaborator Jeremy K. Herren came to the same conclusion.

Inbreeding and mitochondria: Recently, Phil Hedrick argued that since mitochondria are haploid, individuals cannot inbreed at mitochondrial loci. His argument is based on a common definition of the inbreeding level as the deviation in genotype frequencies from Hardy-Weinberg expectations (i.e. binomial sampling). With this definition of inbreeding, we cannot measure inbreeding at haploid loci, and therefore mitochondria cannot be inbred. Although this makes some sense, we countered that individuals cannot be inbred at haploid loci, they can inbreed with respect to mitochondrial loci. That is we consider mating between relatives tobe inbreeding, while Hedrick considers the deviation from Hardy Weinberg to be inbreeding. In our response we pointed out a few benefits of our ‘process’ rather than ‘outcome’ – oriented approach.

comments/thoughts appreciated

yb

Best Commercial Ever.

At NESCENT, I hung out with my friend, jon wilkins. Jon maintains a broad internet presence including his cartoon, Darwin eats cake,  and his blog, Lost in transcription. Jon pointed out the most incredible commercial ever on his blog.

So, this is apparently an actual television ad for Burger King in Russia, which is soooo much better than Burger King in America.

At Burger King in Russia, you ride on unicorn. At Burger King in Capitalist America, unicorn rides you!