Advertisement

Genetica

, Volume 76, Issue 3, pp 181–190 | Cite as

Les chromosomes du rat de Cuming,Phloeomys cumingi Waterhouse, 1839 (Mammalia: Rodentia)

  • M. Jotterand-Bellomo
  • P. Schauenberg
Article

Résumé

La formule chromosomique dePhloeomys cumingi est décrite pour la première fois. Le nombre diploïde est de 40 dans les deux sexes, le nombre fondamental de 60. Les 38 autosomes se répartissent en 5 paires de submétacentriques, 4 paires de métacentriques, 6 paires de grands acrocentriques et 4 paires de petits acrocentriques. Les chromosomes sexuels sont de grande taille et riches en hétérochromatine. L'analyse comparée des chromosomes dePhloeomys avec ceux deMus musculus et deRattus norvegicus permet de mettre en évidence de nombreuses analogies entre ces 3 espèces. II ressort de la comparaison des chromosomes dePhloeomys avec le caryotype ancestral des Cricetidae que onze paires de chromosomes au moins ont conservé le ‘banding’ G originel. Bien que les données chromosomiques révèlent une parenté étroite entrePhloeomys et Muridae, elles n'excluent pas l'appartenance possible de cette espèce à une famille particulière, celle des Phloeomyidae.

Abstract

The chromosome formula ofPhloeomys cumingi is described for the first time. The diploid number is 40 in both sexes, the fundamental number is 60. The 38 autosomes are divided into 5 pairs of submetacentrics, 4 pairs of metacentrics, 6 pairs of large acrocentrics and 4 pairs of small acrocentrics. The sex chromosomes are large and rich in C-positive heterochromatin. The comparative analysis of the chromosomes ofPhloeomys with those ofMus musculus andRattus norvegicus puts forward numerous analogies between these 3 species. According to the comparison of the chromosomes ofPhloeomys with the ancestral karyotype of the Cricetidae, eleven chromosome pairs at least have conserved their original G-banding pattern. Although chromosome data reveal a close relationship betweenPhloeomys and Muridae, they do not exclude the possible belonging of this species to a separate family, that of Phloeomyidae.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Accolla, R. S., Jotterand-Bellomo, M., Scarpellino, L., Maffei, A., Carra, G. & Guardiola, J., 1986. aIr-1, a newly found locus on mouse chromosome 16 encoding a trans-acting activator factor for MHC class II gene expression. J. exp. Med. 164: 369–374.Google Scholar
  2. Alston, E. R., 1876. On the classification of the Order Glires. Proc. zool. Soc. London: 61–98.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, S. & Knox Jones, J., 1984. Orders and families of recent mammals of the world. Ed. John Wiley and sons, 358–360.Google Scholar
  4. Committee for a standardized karyotype of Rattus norvegicus. 1973. Standard karyotype of the Norway rat, Rattus norvegicus. Cytogenet. Cell Genet. 12: 199–206.Google Scholar
  5. Committee on standardized genetic nomenclature for mice. 1972. Standard karyotype of the mouse, Mus musculus. J. Hered. 63: 69–72.Google Scholar
  6. Cooper, J. E. & Hsu, T. C., 1972. The C-band and G-band patterns of Microtus agrestis chromosomes. Cytogenetics 11: 295–304.Google Scholar
  7. Cowell, J. K., 1984. A photographic representation of the variability in the G-banded structure of the chromosomes in the mouse karyotype. A guide to the identification of the individual chromosomes. Chromosoma 89: 294–320.Google Scholar
  8. Eisentraut, M., 1976. Das Gaumenfaltenmuster der Säugetiere und seine Bedeutung für stammesgeschichtliche und taxonomische Untersuchungen. Bonn. zool. Monogr. 8: 1–214.Google Scholar
  9. Ellerman, J. R., 1941. The families and genera of living rodents. Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.) London: 690.Google Scholar
  10. Hsu, T. C. & Kellogg, D. S., 1960. Primary cultivation and continuous propagation in vitro of tissues from small biopsy specimens. J. natn. Cancer Inst. 25: 221–235.Google Scholar
  11. Jotterand-Bellomo, M., 1986. Le genre Mus africain, un exemple d'homogénéité caryotypique: étude cytogénétique de Mus minutoides/musculoides (Côte d'Ivoire), de Mus setulosus (République Centrafricaine) et de Mus mattheyi (Burkina Faso). Cytogenet. Cell Genet. 42: 99–104.Google Scholar
  12. Keller, A., 1983. Note sur la structure fine des poils du Rat de Cuming, Phloeomys cumingi Waterhouse (Mammalia: Rodentia). Rev. suisse Zool. 90: 951–957.Google Scholar
  13. Koop, B. F., Baker, R. J., Haiduk, M. W. & Engstrom, M. D., 1984. Cladistical analysis of primitive G band sequences for the karyotype of the ancestor of the Cricetidae complex of rodents. Genetica 64: 199–208.Google Scholar
  14. Nesbitt, M. N. & Francke, U., 1973. A system of nomenclature for band patterns of mouse chromosomes. Chromosoma (Berl.) 41: 145–158.Google Scholar
  15. Schauenberg, P., 1978. Note sur le Rat de Cuming Phloeomys cumingi Waterhouse, 1839 (Rodentia, Phloeomyidae). Rev. suisse Zool. 85: 341–347.Google Scholar
  16. Schauenberg, P., 1983. Un étrange rongeur. Musées de Genève 231: 4–8.Google Scholar
  17. Tate, G. H. H., 1936. Results of the Archbold expeditions. No. 13. Some Muridae of the Indo Australian region. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 72: 501–728.Google Scholar
  18. Vaucher, C. & Durette-Desset, M. C., 1983. Neoheligmonella schauenbergi n. sp. (Nematoda: Trichostrongyloidea), parasite du Rat de Cuming Phloeomys cumingi Waterhouse. Rev. suisse Zool. 90: 935–938.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Jotterand-Bellomo
    • 1
  • P. Schauenberg
    • 2
  1. 1.Division de Génétique médicaleCHUVLausanneSwitzerland
  2. 2.Muséum d'Histoire NaturelleGenève 6Switzerland

Personalised recommendations