Chromosome Research

, Volume 4, Issue 2, pp 115–123 | Cite as

Chromosome-specific paints from a high-resolution flow karyotype of the dog

  • Cordelia F. Langford
  • Patricia E. Fischer
  • Matthew M. Binns
  • Nigel G. Holmes
  • Nigel P. Carter
Article

Abstract

Using peripheral blood lymphocyte cultures and duallaser flow cytometry, we have routinely obtained high-resolution bivariate flow karyotypes of the dog in which 32 peaks are resolved. To allow the identification of the chromosome types in each peak, chromosomes were flow sorted, amplified and labelled by polymerase chain reaction with partially degenerate primers and hybridized onto metaphase spreads of a male dog. The chromosome paints from 22 of the 32 peaks each hybridized to single homologue pairs and eight peaks each hybridized to two pairs. Paints from the remaining two peaks hybridized to only one homologue each in the male metaphase spread, thus corresponding to the sex chromosomes X and Y. All of the 38 pairs of autosomes and the two sex chromosomes of the dog could be accounted for in these painting experiments. The positions of chromosomes 1–21 were assigned to the flow karyotype (only chromosomes 1–21 have as yet been officially designated). The high-resolution flow karyotype and the chromosome paints will facilitate further standardization of the dog karyotype. The ability to sort sufficient quantities of dog chromosomes for the production of chromosome-specific DNA libraries has the potential to accelerate the physical and genetic mapping of the dog genome.

Key words

chromosome painting dog chromosomes flow karyotype flow sorting 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Carter NP (1994a) Cytogenetic analysis by chromosome painting.Cytometry 18: 2–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Carter NP (1994b) Bivariate chromosome analysis using a commerical flow cytometer.Methods Mol Biol 29: 187–204.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Carter NP (1994c) Chromosome painting using degenerate oligonucleotide-primed polymerase chain reaction-amplified flow-sorted human chromosomes. In: Celis JE ed.Cell Biology: A Laboratory Handbook, Vol. 2. San Diego: Academic Press, pp 442–449.Google Scholar
  4. Carter NP, Ferguson-Smith MA, Perryman MTet al. (1992) Reverse chromosome painting: a method for the rapid analysis of aberrant chromosomes in clinical cytogenetics.J Med Genet 29: 299–307.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Cremer T, Lichter P, Borden J, Ward DC, Manuelidis L (1988) Detection of chromosome aberrations in metaphase and interphase tumor cells by in situ hybridization using chromosome-specific library probes.Hum Genet 80: 235–246.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Fischer PE, Holmes NG, Dickens HF, Thomas R, Binns MM, Nacheva E (1995) The application of FISH techniques for physical mapping in the dog (Canis familiaris). Mammalian Genome 7.Google Scholar
  7. Jauch A, Wienberg J, Stanyon Ret al. (1992) Reconstruction of genomic rearrangements in great apes and gibbons by chromosome painting.Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 89: 8611–8615.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Holmes NG, Dickens HF, Parker HL, Binns MM, Mellersch CS, Sampson J (1995) Eighteen canine microsatellites.Ann Genet 26: 132–133.Google Scholar
  9. Langford CF, Telenius H, Carter NP, Miller NG, Tucker EM (1992) Chromosome painting using chromosome-specific probes from flow-sorted pig chromosomes.Cytogenet Cell Genet 61: 221–223.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Langford CF, Telenius H, Miller NG, Thomsen PD, Tucker EM (1993) Preparation of chromosome-specific paints and complete assignment of chromosomes in the pig flow karyotype.Anim Genet 24: 261–267.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Lichter P, Cremer T, Borden J, Manuelidis L, Ward DC (1988) Delineation of individual human chromosomes in metaphase and interphase cells by in situ suppression hybridization using recombinant DNA libraries.Hum Genet 80: 224–234.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. O'Brien SJ, Womack JE, Lyons LA, Moore KJ, Jenkins NA, Copeland NG (1993) Anchored reference loci for comparative genome mapping in mammals.Nature Genet 3: 103–112.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Ostrander EA, Mapa FA. Yee M, Rine J (1995) One hundred and one new simple sequence repeat-based markers for the canine genome.Mammalian Genome 6: 192–195.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Pinkel D, Landegent J, Collins Cet al. (1988) Fluorescence in situ hybridization with human chromosome-specific libraries: detection of trisomy 21 and translocations of chromosome 4.Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 85: 9138–9142.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Rabbitts P, Impey H, Heppell-Partonet al. (1995) Chromosome specific paints from a high resolution flow karyotype of the mouse.Nature Genet 9: 369–375.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Rettenberger G, Klett C, Zechner U, Kunz J, Vogel W, Hameister H (1995) Visualization of the conservation of synteny between humans and pigs by heterologous chromosomal painting.Genomics 26: 372–378.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Scherthan H, Cremer T, Arnason Uet al. (1994) Comparative chromosome painting discloses homologous segments in distantly related mammals.Nature Genet 6: 342–347.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Selden JR, Moorhead PS, Oehlert ML, Patterson DF (1975) The giemsa banding pattern of the canine karyotype.Cytogenet Cell Genet 15: 380–387.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Sillar R, Young BD (1981) A new method for the preparation of metaphase chromosomes for flow analysis.J Histochem Cytochem 29: 74–78.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Telenius H, Carter NP, Bebb CEet al. (1992a) Degenerate oligonucleotide-primed PCR: general amplification of target DNA by a single degenerate primer.Genomics 13: 718–725.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Telenius H, Pelmear AH, Tunnacliffe Aet al. (1992b) Cytogenetic analysis by chromosome painting using DOP-PCR amplified flow-sorted chromosomes.Genes Chrom Cancer 4: 257–263.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Trask B, van-den-Engh G, Gray JW (1989a) Inheritance of chromosome heteromorphisms analyzed by high-resolution bivariate flow karyotyping.Am J Hum Genet 45: 753–760.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Trask B, van-den-Engh G, Mayall B, Gray JW (1989b) Chromosome heteromorphism quantified by high-resolution bivariate flow karyotyping.Am J Hum Genet 45: 739–752.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. VanDevanter DR, Choongkittaworn NM, Dyer KAet al. (1994) Pure chromosome-specific PCR libraries from single sorted chromosomes.Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91: 5858–5862.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Verma RS, Babu A (1995)Human Chromosomes: Principles and Techniques, 2nd edn. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  26. Wayne RK (1993) Molecular evolution of the dog family.Trends Genet 9: 218–824.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Wienberg J, Stanyon R, Jauch A, Cremer T (1992) Homologies in human andMacaca fuscata chromosomes revealed byin situ suppression hybridization with human chromosome specific DNA libraries.Chromosoma 101: 265–270.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Yang F, Carter NP, Shi L, Ferguson-Smith MA (1995) A comparative study of karyotypes of muntjacs by chromosome painting.Chromosoma 103: 642–652.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Yerle M, Schmitz A, Milan Det al. (1993) Accurate characterization of porcine bivariate flow karyotype by PCR and fluorescence in situ hybridization.Genomics 16: 97–103.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Rapid Science Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cordelia F. Langford
    • 1
  • Patricia E. Fischer
    • 2
  • Matthew M. Binns
    • 2
  • Nigel G. Holmes
    • 2
  • Nigel P. Carter
    • 1
  1. 1.The Sanger CentreCambridgeUK
  2. 2.Animal Health TrustNewmarketUK

Personalised recommendations