, Volume 127, Issue 2, pp 269–278 | Cite as

More sex chromosomes than autosomes in the Amazonian frog Leptodactylus pentadactylus

  • T. Gazoni
  • C. F. B. Haddad
  • H. Narimatsu
  • D. C. Cabral-de-Mello
  • M. L. Lyra
  • P. P. Parise-MaltempiEmail author
Original Article


Heteromorphic sex chromosomes are common in eukaryotes and largely ubiquitous in birds and mammals. The largest number of multiple sex chromosomes in vertebrates known today is found in the monotreme platypus (Ornithorhynchus anatinus, 2n = 52) which exhibits precisely 10 sex chromosomes. Interestingly, fish, amphibians, and reptiles have sex determination mechanisms that do or do not involve morphologically differentiated sex chromosomes. Relatively few amphibian species carry heteromorphic sex chromosomes, and when present, they are frequently represented by only one pair, either XX:XY or ZZ:ZW types. Here, in contrast, with several evidences, from classical and molecular cytogenetic analyses, we found 12 sex chromosomes in a Brazilian population of the smoky jungle frog, designated as Leptodactylus pentadactylus Laurenti, 1768 (Leptodactylinae), which has a karyotype with 2n = 22 chromosomes. Males exhibited an astonishing stable ring-shaped meiotic chain composed of six X and six Y chromosomes. The number of sex chromosomes is larger than the number of autosomes found, and these data represent the largest number of multiple sex chromosomes ever found among vertebrate species. Additionally, sequence and karyotype variation data suggest that this species may represent a complex of species, in which the chromosomal rearrangements may possibly have played an important role in the evolution process.


Meiotic multivalents Multiple sex chromosomes Translocations Amphibia Leptodactylidae 



We thank Natalia Maria Espíndola Salles, Juliano Mafra Neves, and Karll Cavalcante Pinto for help in field work, and to João Rodrigo Cabeza as well as Companhia Hidrelétrica Teles Pires for allowing collecting activities in their study areas. We are grateful to Heidi Horn, for a revision in the final version of this manuscript. TG thanks Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade (ICMBio – SISBIO) for providing a collection permit (no. 30202-2). The authors are also grateful to the Centro de Estudos de Insetos Sociais, UNESP – Univ. Estadual Paulista, Rio Claro, Brazil, for allowing the utilization of facilities for molecular analyses.

Author contributions

T. G., P. P. P. M., and C. F. B. H. designed the study. T. G. performed the cytogenetic analyses. D. C. C. M. assisted on microsatellite and CGH experiments. M. L. L. performed DNA sequencing and similarity analyses. T. G. and H. N. collected the specimens. T. G. and P. P. P. M. wrote the main manuscript, and all authors contributed to improve it. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript.


This work was supported by Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior – CAPES, which provided a PhD fellowship to TG, by Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico - CNPq for research funding (no. 473264/212-9) to PPPM, and by São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) for a research grant (no. 2013/50741–7) to CFBH. CNPq provided a research fellowship to CFBH.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. All procedures performed in studies involving animals were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institution or practice at which the studies were conducted.

Supplementary material

412_2018_663_MOESM1_ESM.docx (69 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 69 kb)


  1. Abramyan J, Ezaz T, Graves JAM, Koopmanand P (2009) W sex chromosomes in the cane toad (Bufo marinus). Chromosom Res 17(8):1015–1024. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amaro-Ghilardi RC, Rodrigues MT, Yonenaga-Yassuda YY (2004) Chromosomal studies after differential staining and fluorescence in situ hybridization using telomeric probe in three Leptodactylus species (Leptodactylidae, Anura). Caryologia 57(1):53–65. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bachtrog D, Mank JE, Peichel CL, Kirkpatrick M, Otto SP, Ashman T-L, Hahn MW, Kitano J, Mayrose I, Ming R, Perrin N, Ross L, Valenzuela N, Vamosi JC (2014) Sex determination: why so many ways of doing it? PLoS Biol 12(7):e1001899. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Baldissera FA Jr, Oliveira PSL, Kasahara S (1993) Cytogenetics of four Brazilian Hyla species (Amphibia-Anura) and description of a case with a supernumerary chromosome. Rev Bras Genet 16:335–345Google Scholar
  5. Bogart JP (1974) A karyosystematic study of frogs in the genus Leptodactylus (Anura: Leptodactylidae). Copeia 3:728–737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brum-Zorilla N, Saez FA (1968) Chromosomes of Leptodactylidae (Amphibia Anura). Experientia 24(9):969. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Campos JRC, Ananias F, Haddad CFB, Kasahara S (2008) Karyotypic similarity among Barycholos ternetzi and five species of the genus Eleutherodactylus from southeastern Brazil (Anura, Brachycephalidae). Micron 39(2):151–159. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Clement M, Posada D, Crandall KA (2000) TCS: a computer program to estimate gene genealogies. Mol Ecol 9(10):1657–1659. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Cnaani A, Lee BY, Zilberman N, Ozouf-Costaz C, Hulata G, Ron M, D’Hont A, Baroiller JF, D’Cotta H, Penman DJ, Tomasino E, Coutanceau JP, Pepey E, Shirak A, Kocher TD (2008) Genetics of sex determination in Tilapiine species. Sex Dev 2(1):43–54. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Coelho AC, de Mattos TL, Viana P, Terencio ML, Schneider CH, Menin M, Gross MC (2016) Intra-generic and interspecific karyotype patterns of Leptodactylus and Adenomera (Anura, Leptodactylidae) with inclusion of five species from Central Amazonia. Genetica 144(1):37–46. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Crawford AJ (2003) Huge populations and old species of costa Rican and Panamanian dirt frogs inferred from mitochondrial and nuclear gene sequences. Mol Ecol 12(10):2525–2540. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Ellegren H (2011) Sex-chromosome evolution: recent progress and the influence of male and female heterogamety. Nat Rev Genet 12(3):157–166. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Frost DR (2017) Amphibian species of the world: an online reference (Version 6.0) Accessed 10 March 2017
  14. Gamble T, Geneva AJ, Glor RE, Zarkower D (2014) Anolis sex chromosomes are derived from a single ancestral pair. Evolution 68(4):1027–1041. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Gatto KP, Busin CS, Lourenço LB (2016) Unraveling the sex chromosome heteromorphism of the paradoxical frog Pseudis tocantins. PLoS One 11(5):e0156176. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Gazoni T, Gruber SL, Silva APZ, Araújo OGS, Narimatsu H, Strüssmann C, Haddad CFB, Kasahara S (2012) Cytogenetic analyses of eight species in the genus Leptodactylus Fitzinger, 1843 (Amphibia, Anura, Leptodactylidae), including a new diploid number and a karyotype with multiple translocations. BMC Genet 13(1):109. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Graves JAM (2016) Evolution of vertebrate sex chromosomes and dosage compensation. Nat Rev Genet 17(1):33–46. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Gross MC, Feldberg E, Cella DM, Schneider MC, Schneider CH, Porto JI, Martins C (2009) Intriguing evidence of translocations in discus fish (Symphysodon, Cichlidae) and a report of the largest meiotic chromosomal chain observed in vertebrates. Heredity 102(5):435–441. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Gruetzner F, Ashley T, Rowell DM, Graves JAM (2006) How did the platypus get its sex chromosome chain? A comparison of meiotic multiples and sex chromosomes in plants and animals. Chromosoma 115(2):75–88. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Grützner F, Rens W, Tsend-Ayush E, El-Mogharbel N, O’Brien PCM, Jones RC, Ferguson-Smith MA, Graves JAM (2004) In the platypus a meiotic chain of ten sex chromosomes shares genes with the bird Z and mammal X chromosomes. Nature 432(7019):913–917. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Guerrero R, Kirkpatrick M, Perrin N (2012) Cryptic recombination in the ever-young sex chromosomes of hylid frogs. J Evol Biol 25(10):1947–1954. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Guindon S, Dufayard JF, Lefort V, Anisimova M, Hordijk W, Gascuel O (2010) New algorithms and methods to estimate maximum-likelihood phylogenies: assessing the performance of PhyML 3.0. Syst Biol 59(3):307–321. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Heyer WR, Diment MJ (1974) The karyotype of Vanzolinius discodactylus and comments on usefulness of karyotypes in determining relationships in the Leptodactylus-Complex (Amphibia, Leptodactylidae). Proc Biol Soc Wash 87:327–336Google Scholar
  24. Hotz H, Uzzellt T, Berger L (1997) Linkage groups of protein-coding genes in western Palearctic water frogs reveal extensive evolutionary conservation. Genetics 147(1):255–270PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Katoh S (2013) MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: improvements in performance and usability. Mol Biol Evol 30(4):772–780. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Lefort V, Longueville JM, Gascuel O (2017) SMS: smart model selection in PhyML. Mol Biol and Evol 34(9):2422–2424. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lourenço LB, Recco-Pimentel SM, Cardoso AJ (2000) A second case of multivalent meiotic configurations in diploid species of Anura. Genet Mol Biol 23(1):131–133. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lyra ML, Haddad CFBH, Azeredo-Espin AML (2016) Meeting the challenge of DNA barcoding amphibians from Neotropics: polymerase chain reaction optimization and new COI primers. Mol Ecol Resour 17(5):966–980. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Malone JH, Fontenot BE (2008) Patterns of reproductive isolation in toads. PLoS One 3(12):e3900. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Maniatis T, Fritsch EF, Sambrook J (1982) Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Matsubara K, Knopp T, Sarre SD, Georges A, Ezaz T (2013) Karyotypic analysis and FISH mapping of microsatellite motifs reveal highly differentiated XX/XY sex chromosomes in the pink-tailed wormlizard (Aprasia parapulchella, Pygopodidae, Squamata). Mol Cytogenet 6(1):60. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. Matsubara K, O’Meally D, Azad B, Georges A, Sarre SD, Graves JA, Matsuda Y, Ezaz T (2016) Amplification of microsatellite repeat motifs is associated with the evolutionary differentiation and heterochromatinization of sex chromosomes in Sauropsida. Chromosoma 125(1):111–123. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Meunier-Rotival M, Cortadas J, Macaya G, Bernardi G (1979) Isolation and organization of calf ribosomal DNA. Nucleic Acids Res 6(6):2109–2123. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. Miura I (2007) An evolutionary witness: the frog Rana rugosa, underwent change of heterogametic sex from XY male to ZW female. Sex Dev 1(6):323–331. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Murtagh CE (1977) Unique cytogenetic system in monotremes. Chromosoma 65(1):37–57. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. O’Meally D, Patel HR, Stiglec R, Sarre SD, Georges A, Graves JAM, Ezaz T (2010) Non-homologous sex chromosomes of birds and snakes share repetitive sequences. Chromosom Res 18(7):787–800. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Palumbi SR, Martin AP, Romano SL, Mcmillan WO, Stice L, Grabowski G (1991) The simple fool’s guide to PCR. Honolulu, Dept. of Zoology, University of HawaiiGoogle Scholar
  38. Perrin N (2009) Sex reversal: a fountain of youth for sex chromosomes? Evolution 63(12):3043–3049. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Pinkel D, Straume T, Gray JW (1986) Cytogenetic analysis using quantitative, high-sensitivity, fluorescence hybridization. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 83(9):2934–2938. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. Pokorná M, Altmanová M, Kratochvíl L (2014) Multiple sex chromosomes in the light of female meiotic drive in amniote vertebrates. Chromosom Res 22(1):35–44. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rens W, O’Brien PCM, Grützner F, Clarke O, Graphodatskaya D, Tsend-Ayush E, Trifonov VA, Skelton H, Wallis MC, Johnston S, Veyrunes F, Graves JAM, Ferguson-Smith MA (2007) The multiple sex chromosomes of platypus and echidna are not completely identical and several share homology with the avian Z. Genome Biol 8(11):R243. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. Rodrigues N, Vueille Y, Brelsford BA, Merilä J, Perrin N (2016) The genetic contribution to sex determination and number of sex chromosomes vary among populations of common frogs (Rana temporaria). Heredity 117(1):25–32. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. Ross JA, Urton JR, Boland J, Shapiro MD, Peichel CL (2009) Turnover of sex chromosomes in the stickleback fishes (Gasterosteidae). PLoS Genet 5(2):e1000391. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. Rovatsos M, Pokorná MJ, Kratochvíl L (2015) Differentiation of sex chromosomes and karyotype characterisation in the Dragonsnake Xenodermus javanicus (Squamata: Xenodermatidae). Cytogenet Genome Res 147(1):48–54. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Sarre SD, Ezaz T, Georges A (2011) Transitions between sex-determining systems in reptiles and amphibians. Annu Rev Genom Human Genet 12(1):391–406. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schartl M (2004) Sex chromosome evolution in non-mammalian vertebrates. Curr Opin Genet Dev 14(6):634–641. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Schmid M (1978) Chromosome banding in Amphibia. I. Constitutive heterochromatin and nucleolus organizer regions in Bufo and Hyla. Chromosoma 66(4):361–388. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schmid M, Steinlein C, Feichtinger W (1992) Chromosome banding in Amphibia. XVII. First demonstration of multiple sex chromosomes in amphibians: Eleutherodactylus maussi (Anura, Leptodactylidae). Chromosoma 101(5-6):284–292. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Schmid M, Feichtinger W, Steilein C, Visbal García R, Fernandez Badillo A (2003) Chromosome banding in Amphibia XXVIII. Homomorphic XY sex chromosomes and derived Y-autosome translocation in Eleutherodactylus riveroi (Anura, Leptodactylidae). Cytogenet Genome Res 101(1):62–73. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Schmid M, Steinlein C, Bogart JP, Feichtinger W, León P, La Marca E, Diaz LM, Sanz A, Chen S-H, Hedges SB (2010) The chromosomes of Terraranan frogs: insights into vertebrate cytogenetics. Cytogenet Genome Res 130-131(1-8):1–568. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Šíchová J, Voleníková A, Dincă V, Nguyen P, Vila R, Sahara K, Marec F (2015) Dynamic karyotype evolution and unique sex determination systems in Leptidea wood white butterflies. BMC Evol Biol 15(1):89. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  52. Šíchová J, Ohno M, Dincă V, Watanabe M, Sahara K, Marec F (2016) Fissions, fusions, and translocations shaped the karyotype and multiple sex chromosome constitution in the northeast-Asian wood white butterfly, Leptidea amurensis. Biol J Linnean Soc 118(3):457–471. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Singh L, Panicker SG, Nagaraj R, Majumdar KC (1994) Banded krait minor-satellite (Bkm)-associated Y chromosome-specific repetitive DNA in mouse. Nucleic Acids Res 22(12):2289–2295. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  54. Siqueira S, Ananias F, Recco-Pimentel SM (2004) Cytogenetics of three Brazilian species of Eleutherodactylus (Anura, Leptodactylidae) with 22 chromosomes and re-analysis of multiple translocations in E. binotatus. Genet Mol Biol 27(3):363–372. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Stöck M, Croll D, Dumas Z, Biollay S, Wang J, Perrin N (2011a) A cryptic heterogametic transition revealed by sex-linked DNA markers in Palearctic green toads. J Evol Biol 24(5):1064–1107. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Stöck M, Horn A, Grossen C, Lindtke D, Sermier R, Betto-Colliard C, Dufresnes C, Bonjour E, Dumas Z, Luquet E, Maddalena T, Sousa HC, Martinez-Solano I, Perrin N (2011b) Ever-young sex-chromosomes in European tree frogs. PLoS Biol 9(5):e1001062. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. Stöck M, Savary R, Betto-Colliard C, Biollay S, Jourdan-Pineau H, Perrin N (2013a) Low rates of X-Y recombination, not turnovers, account for homomorphic sex chromosomes in several diploid species of Palearctic green toads (Bufo viridis subgroup). J Evol Biol 26(3):674–682. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Stöck M, Savary R, Zaborowska A, Górecki G, Brelsford A, Rozenblut-Kościsty B, Ogielska M, Perrin N (2013b) Maintenance of ancestral sex chromosomes in Palearctic tree frogs: direct evidence from Hyla orientalis. Sex Dev 7(5):261–266. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Tamura K, Stecher G, Peterson D, Filipski A, Kumar S (2013) MEGA6: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Version 6.0. Molecular Biology and Evolution 30 (12):2725–2729Google Scholar
  60. Tanaka K, Takehana Y, Naruse K, Hamaguchi S, Sakaizumi M (2007) Evidence for different origins of sex chromosomes in closely related Oryzias fishes: substitution of the master sex-determining gene. Genetics 177(4):2075–2081. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  61. Uno Y, Nishida C, Yoshimoto S, Ito M, Oshima Y (2008) Diversity in the origins of sex chromosomes in anurans inferred from comparative mapping of sexual differentiation genes for three species of the Raninae and Xenopodinae. Chromosom Res 16(7):999–1011. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Van der Meijden A, Vences M, Hoegg S, Boistel R, Channing A, Meyer A (2007) Nuclear gene phylogeny of narrow-mouthed toads (family: Microhylidae) and a discussion of competing hypotheses concerning their biogeographical origins. Mol Phylogenet Evol 44(3):1017–1030. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Vieites DR, Wollenberg KC, Andreone F, Köhler J, Glaw F, Vences M (2009) Vast underestimation of Madagascar’s biodiversity evidenced by an integrative amphibian inventory. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106(20):8267–8272. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  64. Villesen P (2007) FaBox: an online toolbox for FASTA sequences. Mol Ecol Notes 7(6):965–968. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Volff JN, Nanda I, Schmid M, Schartl M (2007) Governing sex determination in fish: regulatory putsches and ephemeral dictators. Sex Dev 2:85–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wiens JJ, Fetzner JW Jr, Parkinson CL, Reeder TW (2005) Hylid frog phylogeny and sampling strategies for speciose clades. Syst Biol 54(5):778–807. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Wright AE, Dean R, Zimmer F, Mank JE (2016) How to make a sex chromosome. Nat Commun 7:12087. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. Gazoni
    • 1
  • C. F. B. Haddad
    • 2
  • H. Narimatsu
    • 1
  • D. C. Cabral-de-Mello
    • 1
  • M. L. Lyra
    • 2
  • P. P. Parise-Maltempi
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Departamento de Biologia, Instituto de BiociênciasUNESP – Universidade Estadual PaulistaSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.Departamento de Zoologia and Centro de Aquicultura (CAUNESP), Instituto de BiociênciasUNESP – Universidade Estadual PaulistaSão PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations