Journal of Genetics

, Volume 73, Issue 2–3, pp 57–64

Mitochondrial DNA restriction maps ofMus booduga, Mus terricolor andMus musculus tytleri

  • B. Chatterjee
  • M. Bahadur
  • T. Sharma
Article

Abstract

Restriction maps of milochondrial DNA of the Indian pygmy field miceMus booduga andM. terricolor, and the house mouseM. musculus tytleri were determined with seven six-cutter restriction enzymes. The restriction map of the mitochondrial DNA of the laboratory mouseM. m. domesticus was used as a reference. Pairwise comparison was made of the mitochondrial DNAs for the presence or absence of the restriction sites, and per cent sequence divergence was calculated. The results show that the sequence divergence betweenbooduga andterricolor is 8-7% while thedomesticus-tytleri andbooduga-terricolor groups are divergent by 16-3%. The mtDNA sequence divergences we have obtained suggest that thebooduga-terricolor lineage might not have diverged before the Southeast Asiancervicolor-cookii-caroli lineage during evolution of these lineages of the subgenusMus as inferred by others earlier. On the other hand, it seems likely that these lineages evolved in parallel.

Keywords

Mus booduga Mus terricolor Mus musculus mitochondrial DNA restriction mapping sequence divergence 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bahadur M. and Sharma T. 1993 Results of hybridization between two chromosome types ofMus dunni, and occurrence of a unique feature of increase in size of autosomal heterochromatic short arms.XVI All India Cell Biology Conference, Abstract no. 82Google Scholar
  2. Bibb M. J., Etten R. A. V., Wright C. T., Walberg M. W. and Clayton D. A. 1981 Sequence and gene organization of mouse mitochondrial DNA.Cell 26: 167–180PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bonhomme F., Catalan J., Britton-Davidian J., Chapman V. M., Moriwaki K., Nevo E. and Thaler L. 1984 Biochemical diversity and evolution in genusMus.Biochem, Genet. 22: 275–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown W. M., George M. and Wilson A. C. 1979 Rapid evolution of animal mitochondrial DNA.Proc. Nail. Acad. Sci. USA 76: 1967–1971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Butner K. A. and Lo C. W. 1986 High-frequency DNA rearrangement associated with mouse centromeric satellite DNA.J. Mol. Biol. 187: 547–556PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chatterjee B. and Rao G. R. K. 1984 A simple method for purification of mitochondrial DNA.Indian J. Biochem. Biophys. 21: 377–380Google Scholar
  7. Ellerman J. R. 1961Fauna of India-Mammalia, Rodentia Vol. III, Pt II (ed.) M. L. Roonwal (Delhi: Zoological Survey of India) pp 483–884Google Scholar
  8. Ferris S. D., Sage R. D., Prager E. M., Ritte U. and Wilson A. C. 1983 Mitochondrial DNA evolution in mice.Genetics 105: 681–721PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Jukes T. H. and Cantor C. R. 1969 Evolution of protein molecules. InMammalian protein metabolism Vol. III (ed.) H. N. Munro (New York: Academic Press) pp 21–132Google Scholar
  10. Musser G. G. and Carleton M. D. 1993 Family Muridae. InMammal species of the world: A taxonomic and geographic reference 2nd edn (ed.) D. E. Wilson and D. M. Reeder (Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution) pp 501–756.Google Scholar
  11. Nei M. and Tajima F. 1983 Maximum likelihood estimation of the number of nucleotide substitutions from restriction site data.Genetics 105: 207–217PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Patnaik R., Bahadur M., Sharma T. and Sahni A. 1993 A comparative analysis of molars ofMus booduga, Mus dunni and fossilMus of the Indian subcontinent: Phylogenetic and palaeobiogeographic implications.Curr. Sci. 65: 782–786Google Scholar
  13. Sen S. and Sharma T. 1983 Role of constitutive heterochromatin in evolutionary divergence: Results of chromosome banding and condensation inhibition studies inMus musculus, Mus booduga andMus dunni.Evolution 37: 628–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Sharma T., Cheong N., Sen P. and Sen S. 1986 Constitutive heterochromatin and evolutionary divergence ofMus dunni, M. booduga andM. musculus. Curr. Top. Microbiol.Immunol. 127: 35–44Google Scholar
  15. Sharma T., Balajee A. S. and Cheong N. 1990 Chromosomal speciation: Constitutive heterochromatin and evolutionary differentiation of the Indian pygmy field mice. InTrends in chromosomal research (ed.) T. Sharma (New Delhi: Narosa and Springer)Google Scholar
  16. She J. X., Bonhomme F., Boursot P., Thaler L. and Catzfelis F. 1990 Molecular phylogenies in the genusMus: Comparative analysis of electrophoretic, scn DNA hybridization, and mtDNA RFLP data.Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 41: 83–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Southern E. M. 1975 Detection of specific sequences among DNA fragments separated by gel electrophoresis.J. Mol. Biol. 98: 503–517PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Wahl G. M., Stern M. and Stark G. R. 1979 Efficient transfer of large DNA fragments from agarose gels to diazobenzoxymethyl paper and rapid hybridization by using dextran sul fate.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 76: 3683–3687PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Wilson A. C., Cann R. L., Carr S. M., George M., Gyllensten U. B., Helm-Bychowski K. M., Higuchi R. G., Palumbi S. R., Prager E. M., Sage R. D. and Stoneking M. 1985 Mitochondrial DNA and two perspectives on evolutionary genetics.Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 26: 375–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Yonekawa H., Moriwaki K., Gotoh O., Hayashi J., Watanabe J., Miyashita N., Petras M. L. and Tagashira Y. 1981 Evolutionary relationships among five subspecies ofMus musculus based on restriction enzyme cleavage patterns of mitochondrial DNA.Genetics 98: 801–816PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Academy of Sciences 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. Chatterjee
    • 1
  • M. Bahadur
    • 1
  • T. Sharma
    • 1
  1. 1.Cytogcnctics Laboratory, Centre of Advanced Study in ZoologyBanaras Hindu UniversityVaranasiIndia

Personalised recommendations