Plant Systematics and Evolution

, Volume 192, Issue 3–4, pp 165–176 | Cite as

Comparison of the Giemsa C-banded and N-banded karyotypes of twoElymus species,E. dentatus andE. glaucescens (Poaceae: Triticeae)

  • Ib Linde-Laursen
  • Ole Seberg
  • Björn Salomon


The karyotypes ofElymus dentatus from Kashmir andE. glaucescens from Tierra del Fuego, both carrying genomesS andH, were investigated by C- and N-banding. Both taxa had 2n = 4x = 28. The karyotype ofE. dentatus was symmetrical with large chromosomes. It had 18 metacentric, four submetacentric and six satellited chromosomes. The karyotype ofE. glaucescens resembled that ofE. dentatus, but a satellited chromosome pair was replaced by a morphologically similar, non-satellited pair. The C-banding patterns of both species had from one to five conspicuous and a few inconspicuous bands per chromosome. N-banding differentiated the chromosomes of the constituent genomes by producing bands in theH genome only. TheS genomes of both species were similar with five metacentric and two satellited chromosomes having most conspicuous C-bands at telomeric and distal positions. They resembled theS genome of the genusPseudoroegneria. TheH genomes had four similar metacentric and two submetacentric chromosomes. The seventhH genome chromosome ofE. dentatus was satellited, that ofE. glaucescens nonsatellited, but otherwise morphologically similar. The C-bands were distributed at no preferential positions. TheH genome ofE. dentatus resembles theH genomes of some diploidHordeum taxa.

Key words

Poaceae Triticeae Elymus dentatus E. glaucescens Karyotype Giemsa C-banding N-banding genome differentiation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Agafonov, A. V., 1991: Differential C-banding of Siberian wild rye (Elymus sibiricus L.) chromosomes. — Tsitologiya i Genetika25: 24–28.Google Scholar
  2. Bothmer, R. von, Jacobsen, N., Baden, C., Jørgensen, R. B., Linde-Laursen, I., 1991: An ecogeographical study of the genusHordeum. Systematic and ecogeographic studies on crop genepools7. — Rome: IBPGR.Google Scholar
  3. Bothmer, R. von, Seberg, O., Jacobsen, N., 1992: Genetic resources in theTriticeae. — Hereditas116: 141–150.Google Scholar
  4. Dewey, D. R., 1968: SyntheticAgropyron-Elymus hybrids: III.Elymus canadensis ×Agropyron caninum, A. trachycaulum, andA. striatum. — Amer. J. Bot.55: 1133–1139.Google Scholar
  5. —, 1974: Cytogenetics ofElymus sibiricus and its hybrids withAgropyron tauri, Elymus canadensis, andAgropyron caninum. — Bot. Gaz.135: 80–87.Google Scholar
  6. Dubcovsky, J., Soria, M. A., Martínez, A., 1989: Karyotype analysis of the PatagonianElymus. — Bot. Gaz.150: 462–468.Google Scholar
  7. —, 1992: Variation in the restriction fragments of 18S–26S rRNA loci in South AmericanElymus (Triticeae). — Genome35: 881–885.Google Scholar
  8. Dvořák, J., McGuire, P. E., Mendlinger, S., 1984: Inferred chromosome morphology of the ancestral genome ofTriticum. — Pl. Syst. Evol.144: 209–220.Google Scholar
  9. Endo, T. R., Gill, B. S., 1984: The heterochromatin distribution and genome evolution in diploid species ofElymus andAgropyron. — Canad. J. Genet. Cytol.26: 669–678.Google Scholar
  10. Hsiao, C., Wang, R.R.-C., Dewey, D. R., 1986: Karyotype analysis and genome relationships of 22 diploid species in the tribeTriticeae. — Canad. J. Genet. Cytol.28: 109–120.Google Scholar
  11. Hunziker, J. H., 1966: Numeros chromosomicos y cariotipos de varias especies sudamericanas deAgropyron yElymus (Gramineae). — Kurtziana3: 151–156.Google Scholar
  12. Jensen, K. B., 1993: Cytogenetics ofElymus magellanicus and its intra- and inter-generic hybrids withPseudoroegneria spicata, Hordeum violaceum, E. trachycaulus, E. lanceolatus, andE. glaucus (Poaceae: Triticeae). — Genome36: 72–76.Google Scholar
  13. Kellogg, E. A., 1989: Comments on genomic genera in theTriticeae (Poaceae). — Amer. J. Bot.76: 796–805.Google Scholar
  14. —, Birchler, J. A., 1993: Linking phylogeny and genetics:Zea mays as a tool for phylogenetic studies. — Syst. Biol.42: 415–439.Google Scholar
  15. Levan, A., Fredga, K., Sandberg, A. A., 1965: Nomenclature for centromeric position on chromosomes. — Hereditas52: 201–220.Google Scholar
  16. Linde-Laursen, I., 1975: Giemsa C-banding of the chromosomes of ‘Emir’ barley. — Hereditas81: 285–289.Google Scholar
  17. —, 1981: Giemsa banding patterns of the chromosomes of cultivated and wild barleys. — InAsher, M. J. C., Ellis, R. P., Hayter, A. M., Whitehouse, R. N. H., (Eds): Barley genetics4, pp. 786–795. — Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh Press.Google Scholar
  18. —, 1984: Nucleolus organizer polymorphism in barley,Hordeum vulgare L. — Hereditas100: 33–43.Google Scholar
  19. —, Bothmer, R. von, 1984a: Identification of the somatic chromosomes ofPsathyrostachys fragilis. — Canad. J. Genet. Cytol.26: 430–435.Google Scholar
  20. —, —, 1984b: Giemsa C-banded karyotypes of two subspecies ofHordeum brevisubulatum from China. — Pl. Syst. Evol.145: 259–267.Google Scholar
  21. —, —, Jacobsen, N., 1980: Giemsa C-banding in Asiatic taxa ofHordeum sectionStenostachys with notes on chromosome morphology. — Hereditas93: 235–254.Google Scholar
  22. —, —, —, 1990: Giemsa C-banded karyotypes of diploid and tetraploidHordeum bulbosum (Poaceae). — Pl. Syst. Evol.172: 141–150.Google Scholar
  23. —, —, —, 1992: Relationships in the genusHordeum: Giemsa C-banded karyotypes. — Hereditas116: 111–116.Google Scholar
  24. Löve, Á., 1984: Conspectus of theTriticeae. — Feddes Repert.95: 425–521.Google Scholar
  25. Morris, K. L. D., Gill, B. S., 1987: Genomic affinities of individual chromosomes based on C- and N-banding analyses of tetraploidElymus species and their diploid progenitor species. — Genome29: 247–252.Google Scholar
  26. Park, C. H., Kim, N. S., Walton, P. D., 1990: The Giemsa C-banded karyotype of Canada wildrye (Elymus canadensis). — Pl. Breeding104: 248–251.Google Scholar
  27. Parkash, O., 1979: Cytological investigations in some grasses of northeastern India. — Ph.D. Thesis, Chandigarh.Google Scholar
  28. Runemark, H., Heneen, W. K., 1968:Elymus andAgropyron, a problem of generic delimitation. — Bot. Not.121: 51–79.Google Scholar
  29. Salomon, B., 1994: Taxonomy and morphology of theElymus semicostatus group (Poaceae). — Nordic J. Bot.14: 7–21.Google Scholar
  30. —, Bothmer, R. von, Yang, J. L., Lu, B., 1988: Notes on perennialTriticeae-species in northern Pakistan. — Bot. Jahrb. Syst.110: 7–15.Google Scholar
  31. Schulz-Schaeffer, J., Jurasits, P., 1962: Biosystematic investigations in the genusAgropyron. I. Cytological studies of species karyotypes. — Amer. J. Bot.49: 940–953.Google Scholar
  32. Seberg, O., 1989: A biometrical analysis of the South AmericanElymus glaucescens complex (Poaceae: Triticeae). — Pl. Syst. Evol.166: 91–104.Google Scholar
  33. —, Frederiksen, S., Baden, C., Linde-Laursen, I., 1991:Peridictyon, a new genus from the Balkan peninsula, and its relationship withFestucopsis (Poaceae). — Willdenowia21: 87–104.Google Scholar
  34. Singh, R. J., Tsuchiya, T., 1982: Identification and designation of telocentric chromosomes in barley by means of Giemsa N-banding technique. — Theor. Appl. Genet.64: 13–24.Google Scholar
  35. Soltis, D. E., Soltis, P. S., 1993: Molecular data and the dynamic nature of polyploidy. — Crit. Rev. Pl. Sci.12: 243–273.Google Scholar
  36. Stebbins, G. L., Snyder, L. A., 1956: Artificial and natural hybrids in theGramineae, tribeHordeae. IX. Hybrids between western and eastern North American species. — Amer. J. Bot.43: 305–312.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ib Linde-Laursen
    • 1
  • Ole Seberg
    • 2
  • Björn Salomon
    • 3
  1. 1.Plant Genetics Section, Department of Environmental Science and TechnologyRisø National LaboratoryRoskildeDenmark
  2. 2.Botanical Institute, Botanical LaboratoryUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagen KDenmark
  3. 3.Department of Plant Breeding ResearchThe Swedish University of Agricultural SciencesSvalövSweden

Personalised recommendations