A comparative cytogenetic study of Drosophila parasitoids (Hymenoptera, Figitidae) using DNA-binding fluorochromes and FISH with 45S rDNA probe
- 221 Downloads
Karyotypes of Leptopilina boulardi (Barbotin, Carton et Keiner-Pillault, 1979) (n = 9), L. heterotoma (Thomson, 1862) (n = 10), L. victoriae Nordlander, 1980 (n = 10) and Ganaspis xanthopoda (Ashmead, 1896) (n = 9) (Hymenoptera, Figitidae) were studied using DNA-binding ligands with different base specificity [propidium iodide (PI), chromomycin A3 (CMA3) and 4′,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI)], and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) with a 45S rDNA probe. Fluorochrome staining was similar between the different fluorochromes, except for a single CMA3- and PI-positive and DAPI-negative band per haploid karyotype of each species. FISH with 45S rDNA probe detected a single rDNA site in place of the bright CMA3-positive band, thus identifying the nucleolus organizing region (NOR). Chromosomal locations of NORs were similar for both L. heterotoma and L. victoriae, but strongly differed in L. boulardi as well as in G. xanthopoda. Phylogenetic aspects of NOR localization in all studied species are briefly discussed.
KeywordsHymenoptera Figitidae Karyotypes DNA-binding fluorochromes FISH 45S rDNA
We are grateful to Roma Rajwani for maintaining the laboratory stocks of parasitoids used in this study. The present work was supported by funds from the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (15-04-07709 to VEG, 14-08-01167 and 16-04-01239 to NLB and OVM) as well as from National Science Foundation (1121817), National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (5G12MD007603-30) and National Aeronautical Space Agency (NNX15AB42G) to SG. The content does not represent the official views of the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities or the National Institutes of Health.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Allemand R, Lemaître C, Frey F, Boulétreau M, Vavre F, Nordlander G, van Alphen J, Carton Y (2002) Phylogeny of six African Leptopilina species (Hymenoptera: Cynipoidea, Figitidae), parasitoids of Drosophila, with description of three new species. Ann Soc Entomol Fr 38:319–332. doi: 10.1080/00379271.2002.10697346 Google Scholar
- Bolsheva NL, Gokhman VE, Muravenko OV, Gumovsky AV, Zelenin AV (2012) Comparative cytogenetic study on two species of the genus Entedon Dalman, 1820 (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) using DNA-binding fluorochromes and molecular and immunofluorescent markers. Comp Cytogenet 6(1):79–92. doi: 10.3897/compcytogen.v6i1.2349 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Colinet D, Deleury E, Anselme C, Cazes D, Poulain J, Azema-Dossat C, Belghazi M, Gatti JL, Poirié M (2013) Extensive inter- and intraspecific venom variation in closely related parasites targeting the same host: the case of Leptopilina parasitoids of Drosophila. Insect Biochem Mol Biol 43(7):601–611. doi: 10.1016/j.ibmb.2013.03.010 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Elsik CG, Tayal A, Diesh CM, Unni DR, Emery ML, Nguyen HN, Hagen DE (2016) Hymenoptera Genome Database: integrating genome annotations in HymenopteraMine. Nucleic Acids Research 44(Database issue): D793–D800. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkv1208
- Gauld ID, Bolton B (1988) The Hymenoptera. British Museum (Natural History). Oxford University Press, Oxford, XI + 332 ppGoogle Scholar
- Gokhman VE (2009) Karyotypes of parasitic Hymenoptera. Springer, Dordrecht, XIII + 183 pp. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-9807-9
- Heavner ME, Gueguen G, Rajwani R, Pagan PE, Small C, Govind S (2013) Partial venom gland transcriptome of a Drosophila parasitoid wasp, Leptopilina heterotoma, reveals novel and shared bioactive profiles with stinging Hymenoptera. Gene 526:195–204. doi: 10.1016/j.gene.2013.04.080 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar