Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Types of Selection01:46

Types of Selection

Natural selection influences the frequencies of particular alleles and phenotypes within populations in several different ways. Primarily, natural selection can be directional, stabilizing, or disruptive. Directional selection favors one extreme trait and shifts the population towards that phenotype while selecting against individuals displaying alternate traits. Stabilizing selection favors an intermediate trait with a narrow range of variation. Deviation from the optimal phenotype towards an...
Frequency-dependent Selection01:21

Frequency-dependent Selection

When the fitness of a trait is influenced by how common it is (i.e., its frequency) relative to different traits within a population, this is referred to as frequency-dependent selection. Frequency-dependent selection may occur between species or within a single species. This type of selection can either be positive—with more common phenotypes having higher fitness—or negative, with rarer phenotypes conferring increased fitness.
What is Natural Selection?01:32

What is Natural Selection?

Natural selection is an evolutionary process in which individuals with survival-promoting traits reproduce at higher rates. These favorable traits become more common within a population or species. Naturally selected traits initially arise via random genetic mutations. In order for selection to occur, there must be variation within a population, the trait controlling the variation must be heritable, and there must be an evolutionary advantage for variation in the trait.
Limits to Natural Selection01:38

Limits to Natural Selection

Organisms that are well-adapted to their environment are more likely to survive and reproduce. However, natural selection does not lead to perfectly adapted organisms. Several factors constrain natural selection.
Genetic Drift03:33

Genetic Drift

Natural selection—probably the most well-known evolutionary mechanism—increases the prevalence of traits that enhance survival and reproduction. However, evolution does not merely propagate favorable traits, nor does it always benefit populations.
Hardy-Weinberg Principle01:49

Hardy-Weinberg Principle

Diploid organisms have two alleles of each gene, one from each parent, in their somatic cells. Therefore, each individual contributes two alleles to the gene pool of the population. The gene pool of a population is the sum of every allele of all genes within that population and has some degree of variation. Genetic variation is typically expressed as a relative frequency, which is the percentage of the total population that has a given allele, genotype or phenotype.

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Restructuring breeding programs 2: Assortative mating for improved commercial genetic gain when using optimum contribution selection and diversity introduction.

Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE·2026
Same author

Restructuring breeding programs 1: Integration of diversity.

Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE·2026
Same author

Targeted Allele Frequency Tuning (TAFT) in breeding populations via alternative optimum contribution selection.

Genetics·2026
Same author

Genomic prediction using mCADD scores as prior information in a mouse population.

Genetics·2025
Same author

Incorporating transcriptomic data into genomic prediction models to improve the prediction accuracy of phenotypes of efficiency traits.

Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE·2025
Same author

Multi-Breed Genomic Predictions for Average Daily Gain in Three Italian Beef Cattle Breeds.

Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie·2025
Same journal

Inherited long telomeres induce a genome-wide transcriptional response in budding yeast.

Genetics·2026
Same journal

Adaptive Dynamics of Quantitative Traits in a Steadily Changing Environment.

Genetics·2026
Same journal

Functional Landscape of Zebrafish Gonadotropins and Receptors: A Comprehensive Genetic Analysis.

Genetics·2026
Same journal

Synergistic actions of Nup43 and Myosin VI drive actin cone assembly during Drosophila spermiogenesis.

Genetics·2026
Same journal

Identification of two Cryptococcus neoformans heme transporters involved in Fhb1-mediated nitrosative stress protection in a fission yeast model.

Genetics·2026
Same journal

Analysis of a hypomorphic mei-P26 mutation reveals coordination between developmental programming of germ cells and meiotic chromosome dynamics.

Genetics·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 28, 2026

Following the Dynamics of Structural Variants in Experimentally Evolved Populations
04:52

Following the Dynamics of Structural Variants in Experimentally Evolved Populations

Published on: February 3, 2023

Methods to Detect Selection History in a Population under Ongoing Directional Selection.

Anne C M Jansen1, Mario P L Calus1, Yvonne C J Wientjes1

  • 1Animal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University and Research, 6700 AH, Wageningen, The Netherlands.

Genetics
|May 27, 2026
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Animal breeding uses selection to improve livestock. Two methods, BayesS and G^, can detect selection history, with higher heritability improving detection. Indirect selection detection was limited, with G^ showing some success.

Keywords:
complex traitsindirect selectionpigsselection history

More Related Videos

Design and Use of a Low Cost, Automated Morbidostat for Adaptive Evolution of Bacteria Under Antibiotic Drug Selection
10:50

Design and Use of a Low Cost, Automated Morbidostat for Adaptive Evolution of Bacteria Under Antibiotic Drug Selection

Published on: September 27, 2016

The Use of Chemostats in Microbial Systems Biology
13:19

The Use of Chemostats in Microbial Systems Biology

Published on: October 14, 2013

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 28, 2026

Following the Dynamics of Structural Variants in Experimentally Evolved Populations
04:52

Following the Dynamics of Structural Variants in Experimentally Evolved Populations

Published on: February 3, 2023

Design and Use of a Low Cost, Automated Morbidostat for Adaptive Evolution of Bacteria Under Antibiotic Drug Selection
10:50

Design and Use of a Low Cost, Automated Morbidostat for Adaptive Evolution of Bacteria Under Antibiotic Drug Selection

Published on: September 27, 2016

The Use of Chemostats in Microbial Systems Biology
13:19

The Use of Chemostats in Microbial Systems Biology

Published on: October 14, 2013

Area of Science:

  • Animal Genetics
  • Quantitative Genetics
  • Livestock Breeding

Background:

  • Animal breeding aims to enhance future generations through genetic selection.
  • Understanding selection history is crucial for setting effective breeding goals.
  • Two methods, BayesS and G^, exist to assess selection history using marker data.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the performance of BayesS and G^ in detecting selection in animal breeding.
  • To assess the methods' ability to detect direct and indirect selection, especially for low heritability traits.
  • To compare the effectiveness of these methods under varying simulation parameters.

Main Methods:

  • Simulated direct selection in pigs under phenotypic selection with low heritabilities (0.05-0.3) over 30 generations.
  • Simulated indirect selection using a correlated trait (heritability 0.05, genetic correlation 0.4-0.7).
  • Applied BayesS (estimating s-value) and G^ (calculating expected genetic change) to simulated data.

Main Results:

  • Both BayesS and G^ successfully detected selection.
  • Increased heritability, larger sample size (for BayesS), and longer selection intervals (for G^) enhanced detection.
  • Indirect selection detection was challenging; G^ showed limited success in some scenarios, improved by estimating marker effects in the initial generation.

Conclusions:

  • BayesS and G^ show potential for identifying selection history in animal populations.
  • Method choice depends on the specific population's available data.
  • Detecting indirect selection remains a challenge, requiring further methodological refinement.