4.5 Article

Meiotic Analysis of Gomphidae Species Sheds Light on the Large X Chromosome of the Family (Anisoptera, Odonata)

期刊

DIVERSITY-BASEL
卷 14, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/d14100874

关键词

holokinetic chromosomes; gomphids X chromosome evolution; sex-determination systems; Aphylla; Phyllocycla

资金

  1. National Council of Scientific and Technological Research (CONICET) [11220200102115CO]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the meiosis of three gomphid species from Argentina and found a positive correlation between the size of the X chromosome and the amount of heterochromatin. The results suggest that the large size of the X chromosome may be due to the accumulation of repetitive DNA and heterochromatin rather than fusion.
In most Anisoptera families, the modal diploid number is 25 in males (24 autosomes + X), and the X chromosome is one of the smallest elements of the complement. The family Gomphidae is an exception, as it has a modal diploid number of 23 (22 + X), and the X chromosome is the largest of the complement and of medium-to-large size in many species. We studied the meiosis of three gomphid species from Argentina: Aphylla cf. distinguenda (Campion, 1920), Phyllocycla propinqua Belle, 1972 and Phyllocycla sp. Chromosome number is 2n = 23, n = 11 + X, except for Phyllocycla propinqua, showing n = 10 + X. The X chromosome of these species is medium-sized and presents heteropyknotic blocks of different sizes. Despite the small number of gomphid species analysed, there is a clear trend of increasing size of the X chromosome with the increasing amount of heterochromatin. Our results, together with those from the literature, suggest that its large size might have been due to a progressive accumulation of repetitive DNA and heterochromatinisation and not to fusion, as previously suggested. This led us to propose that the ancestral number coincided with the modal number of Gomphidae. A revision of the derived sex-determining systems in Odonata is also provided.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据