Chromosome Research

, Volume 17, Issue 7, pp 883–898 | Cite as

Complex meiotic configuration of the holocentric chromosomes: the intriguing case of the scorpion Tityus bahiensis

  • Marielle Cristina Schneider
  • Adilson Ariza Zacaro
  • Ricardo Pinto-da-Rocha
  • Denise Maria Candido
  • Doralice Maria Cella
Article
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

Mitotic and meiotic chromosomes of Tityus bahiensis were investigated using light (LM) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) to determine the chromosomal characteristics and disclose the mechanisms responsible for intraspecific variability in chromosome number and for the presence of complex chromosome association during meiosis. This species is endemic to Brazilian fauna and belongs to the family Buthidae, which is considered phylogenetically basal within the order Scorpiones. In the sample examined, four sympatric and distinct diploid numbers were observed: 2n = 5, 2n = 6, 2n = 9, and 2 = 10. The origin of this remarkable chromosome variability was attributed to chromosome fissions and/or fusions, considering that the decrease in chromosome number was concomitant with the increase in chromosome size and vice versa. The LM and TEM analyses showed the presence of chromosomes without localised centromere, the lack of chiasmata and recombination nodules in male meiosis, and two nucleolar organiser regions carrier chromosomes. Furthermore, male prophase I cells revealed multivalent chromosome associations and/or unsynapsed or distinctly associated chromosome regions (gaps, less-condensed chromatin, or loop-like structure) that were continuous with synapsed chromosome segments. All these data permitted us to suggest that the chromosomal rearrangements of T. bahiensis occurred in a heterozygous state. A combination of various factors, such as correct disjunction and balanced segregation of the chromosomes involved in complex meiotic pairing, system of achiasmate meiosis, holocentric nature of the chromosomes, population structure, and species dispersion patterns, could have contributed to the high level of chromosome rearrangements present in T. bahiensis.

Keywords

achiasmate meiosis cytogenetic diploid number nucleolar material synaptonemal complex 

Abbreviations

CV

Coefficient of variation

DSL

Diploid set length

LM

Light microscopy

NOR

Nucleolar organiser region

PTA

Phosphotungstic acid

SC

Synaptonemal complex

TEM

Transmission electron microscopy

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are indebted to two anonymous reviewers for critical reading and valuable suggestions for the manuscript. The authors are also grateful to the Centro de Controle de Zoonoses, from Piracicaba, SP, Brazil, for collecting T. bahiensis. Furthermore, we would like to thank Dr. Flávio H. Caetano and Antonio T. Yabuki, both from the Centro de Microscopia Eletrônica, Departamento de Biologia, Instituto de Biociências, UNESP, Rio Claro, SP, Brazil, for providing access to the infrastructure required for ultrastructural analysis and for technical assistance, respectively. This research was supported by the Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo, FAPESP (06/53275-3).

References

  1. Altiero T, Rebecchi L (2003) First evidence of achiasmatic male meiosis in the water bears Richtersius coronifer and Macrobius richtersi (Eutardigrada, Macrobiotidae). Hereditas 139:116–120CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Benavente R (1982) Holocentric chromosomes of arachnids: presence of kinetochore plates during meiotic divisions. Genetica 59:23–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bloom WL (1974) Origin of reciprocal translocations and their effect in Clarkia speciosa. Chromosoma 49:61–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chinnappa CC, Victor R (1979) Achiasmatic meiosis and complex heterozygosity in female cyclopoid copepods (Copepoda, Crustacea). Chromosoma 71:227–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. da Silva CRM, González-Elizondo MS, Vanzela ALL (2008) Chromosome reduction in Eleocharis maculosa (Cyperaceae). Cytogenet Genome Res 122:175–180CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Dernburg AF (2001) Here, there, and everywhere: kinetochore function on holocentric chromosomes. J Cell Biol 153:33–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fan Q, Yao M (1996) New telomere formation coupled with site-specific chromosome brakage in Tetrahymena thermophila. Mol Cell Biol 16:1267–1274PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Forejt J, Gregorová S, Goetz P (1981) XY pair associates with synaptonemal complex of autosomal male-sterile translocations in pachytene spermatocytes of the mouse (Mus musculus). Chromosoma 82:41–53CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Gassner G (1969) Synaptinemal complexes in the achiasmatic spermatogenesis of Bolbe nigra Giglio-Tos (Mantoidea). Chromosoma 26:22–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gomes FP (1982) Curso de estatística experimental, 10th edn. Nobel, São PauloGoogle Scholar
  11. Gorlov IP, Gorlova OY, Logunov DV (1995) Cytogenetic studies on Siberian spiders. Hereditas 122:211–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gupta AKD, Sarker SK (1965) A study of the meiotic chromosomes of the scorpion Buthus tamulus Fabr. Curr Sci 2:54–55Google Scholar
  13. Howell WM, Black DA (1980) Controlled silver-staining of nucleolus organizer regions with a protective colloidal developer: a 1-step method. Experientia 36:1014–1015CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Ituarte S, Papeschi AG (2004) Achiasmatic male meiosis in Tenagobia (Fuscagobia) fuscata (Stål) (Heteroptera, Corixoidea, Micronectidae). Genetica 122:199–206CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. James SH (1970) Complex hybridity in Isotoma petraea. II. Components and operation of a possible evolutionary mechanism. Heredity 25:53–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. John B (1990) Meiosis. Cambridge University Press, MelbournGoogle Scholar
  17. John B, Lewis KR (1958) Studies on Periplaneta americana. III. Selection for heterozygosity. Heredity 12:185–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. John B, Quraishi HB (1964) Studies on Periplaneta americana. IV. Pakistani populations. Heredity 19:147–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kingswood SC, Kumamoto AT, Sudman PD, Fletcher KC, Greenbaum IF (1994) Meiosis in chromosomally heteromorphic goitered gazelle, Gazella subgutturosa (Artiodactyla, Bovidae). Chromosome Res 2:37–46CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Kodama Y, Yoshida MC, Sasaki M (1980) An improved silver staining technique for nucleolus organizer regions by using nylon cloth. Jpn J Hum Genet 25:229–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Král J, Musilová J, Št’áhlavský F, Řezáč M, Akan Z, Edwards RL, Coyle FA, Almerje CR (2006) Evolution of the karyotype and sex chromosome systems in basal clades of araneomorph spiders (Araneae: Araneomorphae). Chromosome Res 14:859–880CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Lawrence CW (1958) Genotypic control of chromosome behaviour in rye. VI. Selection for disjunction frequency. Heredity 12:127–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lawrence CW (1963) The orientation of multiple associations resulting from interchange heterozygosity. Genetics 48:347–350PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Loidl J, Jones GH (1986) Synaptonemal complex spreading in Allium. I. Triploid A. sphaerocephalon. Chromosoma 93:420–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Luceño M, Guerra M (1996) Numerical variations in species exhibiting holocentric chromosomes: a nomenclatural proposal. Caryologia 49:301–309Google Scholar
  26. Marec F, Traut W (1993) Synaptonemal complexes in female and male meiotic prophase of Ephestia kuehniella (Lepidoptera). Heredity 73:394–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Moore G, Aragón-Alcaide L, Roberts M, Reader S, Miller T, Foote T (1997) Are rice chromosomes components of a holocentric chromosome ancestor? Plant Mol Biol 35:17–23CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Moustafa MA, Alaa AM, Sarlan MH, Yaseen AE (2005) Chromosomal studies on four Egyptian scorpion species of genus Androctonus (Family: Buthidae). Cytologia 70:161–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nagaki K, Kashihara K, Murata M (2005) Visualization of diffuse centromeres with centromere-specific histone H3 in the holocentric plant Luzula nivea. Plant Cell 17:1886–1893CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Piza ST (1943) A propósito da meiose do Tityus bahiensis. Rev Agric 18:351–369Google Scholar
  31. Piza ST (1947a) Notas sôbre cromossômios de alguns escorpiões brasileiros. An Esc Super Agric Luiz de Queiroz 60:169–176Google Scholar
  32. Piza ST (1947b) Uma raça cromossômica natural de Tityus bahiensis (Scorpiones-Buthidae). An Esc Super Agric Luiz de Queiroz 62:183–192Google Scholar
  33. Piza ST (1948a) Primeiras observações sôbre os cromossômios de Tityus trivittatus Krpln (Scorpiones – Buthidae). Rev Agric 24:177–180Google Scholar
  34. Piza ST (1948b) Uma nova raça cromossômica natural de Tityus bahiensis (Scorpiones, Buthidae). Rev Agric 24:181–186Google Scholar
  35. Piza ST (1948c) Variações cromossômicas do Tityus bahiensis de São Joaquim. Rev Agric 24:187–194Google Scholar
  36. Piza ST (1949) “Ouro Preto”, nova e interessante raça cromossômica de Tityus bahiensis (Scorpiones – Buthidae). Sci Genet 3:147–159Google Scholar
  37. Piza ST (1950) Observações cromossômicas em escorpiões brasileiros. Cienc Cult 2:202–206Google Scholar
  38. Piza ST (1957) The chromosomes of Rhopalurus (Scorpiones – Buthidae). Can Entomol 89:565–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Polis GA (1990) Ecology. In: Polis GA (ed) The biology of scorpions. Stanford University Press, Stanford, pp 247–293Google Scholar
  40. Procunier WS (1975) A cytological study of two closely related blackfly species: Cnephia dacotensis and Cnephia ornithophilia (Diptera: Simulidae). Can J Zool 53:1622–1637CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Rasmussen SW (1977) Meiosis in Bombyx mori females. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 277:343–350CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Reed KM, Sites JW Jr, Greenbaum IF (1992) Synapsis, recombination, and meiotic segregation in the mesquite lizard, Sceloporus grammicus, complex. I. Pericentric inversion heteromorphism of the F5 cytotype. Cytogenet Cell Genet 61:40–45CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Rodríguez Gil SG, Mola LM, Papeschi AG, Scioscia CL (2002) Cytogenetic heterogeneity in common haplogyne spiders from Argentina (Arachnida, Araneae). J Arachnol 30:47–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Schneider MC, Zacaro AA, Pinto-da-Rocha R, Candido DM, Cella DM (2009) A comparative cytogenetic analysis of two Bothriuridae species and overview of the chromosome data of Scorpiones. J Heredity 100(5):545–555. doi: 10.1093/jhered/esp023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Serrano J (1981) Male achiasmatic meiosis in Caraboidea (Coleoptera, Adephaga). Genetica 57:131–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Shanahan CM (1989a) Cytogenetics of Australian scorpions. I. Interchange polymorphism in the family Buthidae. Genome 32:882–889Google Scholar
  47. Shanahan CM (1989b) Cytogenetics of Australian scorpions. II. Chromosome polymorphism in species of Urodacus (family Scorpionidae). Genome 32:890–900Google Scholar
  48. Shanahan CM, Hayman DL (1990) Synaptonemal complex formation in male scorpions exhibiting achiasmate meiosis and structural heterozygosity. Genome 33:914–926Google Scholar
  49. Sharma GP, Parshad R, Joneja MG (1959) Chromosome mechanism in the males of three species of scorpions (Scorpiones – Buthidae). Res Bull Panjab Univ Sci 10:197–207Google Scholar
  50. Slijepcevic P, Xiao Y, Natarajan AT, Bryant PE (1997) Instability of CHO chromosomes containing interstitial telomeric sequences originating from Chinese hamster chromosome 10. Cytogenet Cell Genet 76:58–60CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Solari AJ, Counce SJ (1977) Synaptonemal complex karyotyping in Melanoplus differentialis. J Cell Sci 26:229–250PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Soleglad ME, Fet V (2003) High-level systematics and phylogeny of the extant scorpions (Scorpiones: Orthosterni). Euscorpius 11:1–175Google Scholar
  53. Šťáhlavský F, Král J (2004) Karyotype analysis and achiasmatic meiosis in pseudoscorpions of the family Chthoniidae (Arachnida: Pseudoscorpiones). Hereditas 140:49–60CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Sumner AT (1972) A simple technique for demonstrating centromeric heterochromatin. Exp Cell Res 75:304–306CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Sun S, Rees H (1967) Genotypic control of chromosome behaviour in rye. IX. The effect of selection on the disjunction frequency of interchange associations. Heredity 22:249–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Suomalainen E (1966) Achiasmatische oogenese bei trichopteran. Chromosoma 18:201–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Takahashi CS (1976) Cytogenetical studies on the effects of high natural radiation levels in Tityus bahiensis (Scorpiones, Buthidae) from Morro do Ferro, Brazil. Radiat Res 67:371–381CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Thompson JB (1956) Genotypic control of chromosome behaviour in rye. II. Disjunction at meiosis in interchange heterozygotes. Heredity 10:99–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Traut W, Clarke CA (1996) Cytogenetics of a moth species with a low chromosome number, Orgyia thyellina. Hereditas 125:277–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Vítková M, Král J, Traut W, Zrzavý J, Marec F (2005) The evolutionary origin of insect telomeric repeats, (TTAGG)n. Chromosome Res 13:145–156CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. White MJD (1973) Animal cytology and evolution, 3rd edn. Cambridge University Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  62. Wolf KW (1996) The structure of condensed chromosomes in mitosis and meiosis of insects. Int J Insect Morphol Embryol 25:37–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wrensch DL, Kethley JB, Norton RA (1994) Cytogenetics of holokinetic chromosomes and inverted meiosis: keys to the evolutionary success of mites, with generalizations on eukaryotes. In: Houck MA (ed) Mites: ecological and evolutionary analyses of life-history patterns. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 282–343Google Scholar
  64. Zetka MC, Müller F (1996) Telomeres in nematodes. Semin Cell Dev Biol 7:59–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marielle Cristina Schneider
    • 1
  • Adilson Ariza Zacaro
    • 3
  • Ricardo Pinto-da-Rocha
    • 4
  • Denise Maria Candido
    • 5
  • Doralice Maria Cella
    • 2
  1. 1.Departamento de Ciências BiológicasUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, UNIFESPDiademaBrazil
  2. 2.Departamento de BiologiaUniversidade Estadual Paulista, UNESPRio ClaroBrazil
  3. 3.Departamento de Biologia GeralUniversidade Federal de Viçosa, UFVViçosaBrazil
  4. 4.Departamento de ZoologiaUniversidade de São Paulo, USPSão PauloBrazil
  5. 5.Instituto Butantan, Laboratório de ArtrópodesSão PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations