4.1 Article

Chromosome fusion polymorphisms in the grasshopper, Dichroplus fuscus (Orthoptera: Acrididae: Melanoplinae): Insights on meiotic effects

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ENTOMOLOGY
卷 112, 期 1, 页码 11-19

出版社

CZECH ACAD SCI, INST ENTOMOLOGY
DOI: 10.14411/eje.2015.010

关键词

Orthoptera; Acrididae; Dichroplus fuscus; Robertsonian fusion; grasshoppers; chiasmata; trivalents; chromosomal cline

资金

  1. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Tecnicas (CONICET) IBS-Universidad Nacional de Misiones
  2. CEDIT (Comite Ejecutivo de Desarrollo e Innovacion Tecnologica-Misiones)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Robertsonian fusions account for many of the changes in the evolution of the orthopteran karyotype; in their origin, a centric fusion is involved between two acro-telocentric chromosomes, forming a single bi-armed chromosome. It is usual for these rearrangements to be associated with profound changes in meiosis, such as modification in frequency and distribution of chiasmata. Dichroplus fuscus is a South American grasshopper with a wide distribution. In this work we analyzed nine populations from Misiones Province, north-eastern Argentina. This species presents a standard karyotype of 2n = 23/24 (male/female) with all chromosomes acro-telocentric and an X0/XX chromosomal sex determining mechanism. This standard karyotype has been modified by the occurrence of two Robertsonian fusions involving chromosomes 1/3 and 2/4; values of fusions per individual (fpi) show a significant increase in the presence of karyotypic polymorphisms towards southern populations. In individuals showing chromosomal rearrangements, we observed a clear redistribution of chiasmata towards distal positions; significant differences were noted between Robertsonian homozygotes (Ho) and heterozygotes (Ht) for chromosomes arms L-1 and M-3, although this was not the case between Ho and Ht for chromosome arms L-2 and M-4. With regard to the orientation of trivalents, values obtained for non-convergent orientation were low.

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

4.1
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