4.1 Article

Comparison of genomes of eight species of sections Linum and Adenolinum from the genus Linum based on chromosome banding, molecular markers and RAPD analysis

Journal

GENETICA
Volume 135, Issue 2, Pages 245-255

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10709-008-9273-7

Keywords

Ag-NOR-staining; C/DAPI-banding; FISH; 5S and 26S rDNA; Evolution; Linum; Chromosome identification; RAPD-analysis; Taxonomy

Funding

  1. Russian State Foundation for Basic Research [05-08-33607, 06-04-81007, 08-08-00391, 07-04-00268]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Karyotypes of species sects. Linum and Adenolinum have been studied using C/DAPI-banding, Ag-NOR staining, FISH with 5S and 26S rDNA and RAPD analysis. C/DAPI-banding patterns enabled identification of all homologous chromosome pairs in the studied karyotypes. The revealed high similarity between species L. grandiflorum (2n = 16) and L. decumbens by chromosome and molecular markers proved their close genome relationship and identified the chromosome number in L. decumbens as 2n = 16. The similarity found for C/DAPI-banding patterns between species with the same chromosome numbers corresponds with the results obtained by RAPD-analysis, showing clusterization of 16-, 18- and 30-chromosome species into three separate groups. 5S rDNA and 26S rDNA were co-localized in NOR-chromosome 1 in the genomes of all species investigated. In 30-chromosome species, there were three separate 5S rDNA sites in chromosomes 3, 8 and 13. In 16-chromosome species, a separate 5S rDNA site was also located in chromosome 3, whereas in 18-chromosome species it was found in the long arm of NOR-chromosome 1. Thus, the difference in localization of rDNA sites in species with 2n = 16, 2n = 30 and 2n = 18 confirms taxonomists opinion, who attributed these species to different sects. Linum and Adenolinum, respectively. The obtained results suggest that species with 2n = 16, 2n = 18 and 2n = 30 originated from a 16-chromosome ancestor.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available