Genetica

, Volume 134, Issue 3, pp 345–351 | Cite as

Comparative gene mapping in cattle, Indian muntjac, and Chinese muntjac by fluorescence in situ hybridization

  • Andrea E. Murmann
  • Antoaneta Mincheva
  • Markus O. Scheuermann
  • Mathieu Gautier
  • Fentang Yang
  • Johannes Buitkamp
  • Pamela L. Strissel
  • Reiner Strick
  • Janet D. Rowley
  • Peter Lichter
Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

The Indian muntjac (Muntiacus muntjak vaginalis) has a karyotype of 2n = 6 in the female and 2n = 7 in the male. The karyotypic evolution of Indian muntjac via extensive tandem fusions and several centric fusions are well documented by molecular cytogenetic studies mainly utilizing chromosome paints. To achieve higher resolution mapping, a set of 42 different genomic clones coding for 37 genes and the nucleolar organizer region were used to examine homologies between the cattle (2n = 60), human (2n = 46), Indian muntjac (2n = 6/7) and Chinese muntjac (2n = 46) karyotypes. These genomic clones were mapped by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Localization of genes on all three pairs of M. m. vaginalis chromosomes and on the acrocentric chromosomes of M. reevesi allowed not only the analysis of the evolution of syntenic regions within the muntjac genus but also allowed a broader comparison of synteny with more distantly related species, such as cattle and human, to shed more light onto the evolving genome organization.

Keywords

Bos taurus Homo sapiens Mammals Muntiacus muntjak Muntiacus reevesi NOR Synteny 

Abbreviations

BAC

Bacterial artificial chromosome

B. taurus

Bos taurus

FISH

Fluorescence in situ hybridization

M. m. vaginalis

Muntiacus muntjak vaginalis

M. reevesi

Muntiacus reevesi

NOR

Nucleolar organizer region

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

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Dr Jens Eilbracht, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, Heidelberg, Germany, for providing the BT-18S mouse clone and Dr Stuart Schwartz, University of Chicago, for his critical reading.

References

  1. Buitkamp J, Schwaiger FW, Solinas-Toldo S et al (1995) The bovine interleukin-4 gene: genomic organization, localization, and evolution. Mamm Genome 6:350–356PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Carver EA, Stubbs L (1997) Zooming in on the human-mouse comparative map: genome conservation re-examined on a high-resolution scale. Genome Res 7:1123–1137PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Chi JX, Huang L, Nie W et al (2005) Defining the orientation of the tandem fusions that occurred during the evolution of Indian muntjac chromosomes by BAC mapping. Chromosoma 114:167–172PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chowdhary BP, Raudsepp T, Frönicke L et al (1998) Emerging patterns of comparative genome organization in some mammalian species as revealed by Zoo-FISH. Genome Res 8:577–589PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Frönicke L, Scherthan H (1997) Zoo-fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis of human and Indian muntjac karyotypes (Muntiacus muntjak vaginalis) reveals satellite DNA clusters at the margins of conserved syntenic segments. Chromosome Res 5:254–261PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Frönicke L, Chowdhary BP, Scherthan H (1997) Segmental homology among cattle (Bos taurus), Indian muntjac (Muntiacus muntjak vaginalis), and Chinese muntjac (M. reevesi) karyotypes. Cytogenet Cell Genet 77:223–227PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gautier M, Laurent P, Hayes H et al (2001) Development and assignment of bovine-specific PCR systems for the Texas nomenclature marker genes and isolation of homologous BAC probes. Genet Sel Evol 33:191–200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gautier M, Hayes H, Bonsdorff T et al (2003) Development of a comprehensive comparative radiation hybrid map of bovine chromosome 7 (BTA7) versus human chromosomes 1 (HSA1), 5 (HSA5) and 19 (HSA19). Cytogenet Genome Res 102:25–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Grummt I, Soellner C, Scholz I (1979) Characterization of a cloned ribosomal fragment from mouse which contains the 18S coding region and adjacent spacer sequences. Nucleic Acids Res 6:1351–1369PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hartmann N, Scherthan H (2005a) Assignment of telomeric repeat binding factor of genes TERF1 and TERF2 to Indian muntjac chromosome bands 1p32 and 2q33 by in situ hybridization. Cytogenet Genome Res 111:186PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hartmann N, Scherthan H (2005b) Assignment of the telomere-repeat binding factor genes TERF1 and TERF2 to Chinese muntjac (2n = 46) chromosome bands 12q3 and 2q33 by in situ hybridization. Cytogenet Genome Res 111:96PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. ISCNDB2000 (2001) International System for Chromosome Nomenclature of Domestic Bovids. In: Di Berardino D, Di Meo GP, Gallagher DS, Hayes H, Iannuzzi L (co-ordinator) (eds). Cytogenet Cell Genet 92:283–299Google Scholar
  13. Johnston FP, Church RB, Lin CC (1982) Chromosome rearrangement between the Indian muntjac and Chinese muntjac is accompanied by a delection of middle repetitive DNA. Can J Biochem 60:497–506PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kent WJ, Sugnet CW, Furey TS et al (2002) The human genome browser at UCSC. Genome Res 12:996–1006PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Krawetz SA, Herfort MH, Dixon GH (1990) In situ localization of a mammalian protamine gene: parameters affecting specificity of hybridization. Genome 33:459–463PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Lichter P, Tang CJ, Call K et al (1990) High-resolution mapping of human chromosome 11 by in situ hybridization with cosmid clones. Science 247:64–69PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Murmann AE, Gao J, Encinosa M et al (2005) Local gene density predicts the spatial position of genetic loci in the interphase nucleus. Exp Cell Res 311:14–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Oeltjen JC, Malley TM, Muzny DM et al (1997) Large-scale comparative sequence analysis of the human and murine Bruton’s tyrosine kinase loci reveals conserved regulatory domains. Genome Res 7:315–329PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Pardue ML, Hsu TC (1975) Locations of 18S and 28S ribosomal genes on the chromosomes of the Indian muntjac. J Cell Biol 64:251–254PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Passarge E, Horsthemke B, Farber RA (1999) Incorrect use of the term synteny. Nat Genet 23:387PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pennacchio LA (2003) Insights from human/mouse genome comparisons. Mamm Genome 14:429–436PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Renwick JH (1971) The mapping of human chromosomes. Annu Rev Genet 5:81–120PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Scherthan H, Cremer T, Arnason U et al (1994) Comparative chromosome painting discloses homologous segments in distantly related mammals. Nat Genet 6:342–347PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Scheuermann MO, Murmann AE, Richter K et al (2005) Characterization of nuclear compartments identified by ectopic markers in mammalian cells with distinctly different karyotype. Chromosoma 114:39–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Shi L, Pathak S (1981) Gametogenesis in a male Indian muntjac x Chinese muntjac hybrid. Cytogenet Cell Genet 30:152–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shows TB, Brown JA, Chapman VM (1976) Comparative gene mapping of HPRT, G6PD, and PGK in man, mouse, and muntjac deer. Cytogenet Cell Genet 16:436–439PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Spector DL, Goldman RD, Leinwand LA (1998) Cells: a laboratory manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Plainview, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Wurster DH, Benirschke K (1967) Chromosome studies in some deer, the springbok, and the pronghorn, with notes on placentation in deer. Cytologia (Tokyo) 32:273–285Google Scholar
  29. Wurster DH, Benirschke K (1970) Indian muntjac, Muntiacus muntjak: a deer with a low diploid chromosome number. Science 168:1364–1366PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Yang F, Carter NP, Shi L et al (1995) A comparative study of karyotypes of muntjacs by chromosome painting. Chromosoma 103:642–652PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Yang F, Muller S, Just R et al (1997a) Comparative chromosome painting in mammals: human and the Indian muntjac (Muntiacus muntjak vaginalis). Genomics 39:396–401PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yang F, O’Brien PC, Wienberg J et al (1997b) A reappraisal of the tandem fusion theory of karyotype evolution in Indian muntjac using chromosome painting. Chromosome Res 5:109–117PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Yang F, O’Brien PC, Wienberg J et al (1997c) Chromosomal evolution of the Chinese muntjac (Muntiacus reevesi). Chromosoma 106:37–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zhang Y, Shan XN, Lu XX et al (2001) [Cloning, sequencing and chromosome location of Sry gene of Muntiacus muntjak vaginalis by DOP-PCR and microdissection]. Yi Chuan Xue Bao 28:322–326PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea E. Murmann
    • 1
    • 2
  • Antoaneta Mincheva
    • 3
  • Markus O. Scheuermann
    • 3
    • 4
  • Mathieu Gautier
    • 5
  • Fentang Yang
    • 6
  • Johannes Buitkamp
    • 7
  • Pamela L. Strissel
    • 8
  • Reiner Strick
    • 8
  • Janet D. Rowley
    • 1
  • Peter Lichter
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Medicine, Section Hematology/OncologyUniversity of ChicagoChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Human GeneticsUniversity of ChicagoChicagoUSA
  3. 3.Division of Molecular GeneticsGerman Cancer Research CenterHeidelbergGermany
  4. 4.Becton Dickinson GmbHHeidelbergGermany
  5. 5.Institut National de la Recherche AgronomiqueJouy en Josas CedexFrance
  6. 6.The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome CampusCambridgeUK
  7. 7.Institut für Tierzucht, Bayerische Landesanstalt für LandwirtschaftGrubGermany
  8. 8.Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Laboratory for Molecular MedicineUniversity-Clinic ErlangenErlangenGermany

Personalised recommendations