Chromosome Research

, Volume 3, Issue 6, pp 379–385 | Cite as

Restriction endonuclease/nick translation procedure on fixed chromosomes of the Atlantic salmon fish cell line

  • María Abuín
  • Paulino Martínez
  • Laura Sánchez
Article

Abstract

We have used a restriction endonuclease/nick translation (RE/NT) procedure to study the ability of restriction enzymes to cleave DNA in fixed chromosomes of a fish cell line. This technique has proved to be very useful in revealing the chromatin heterogeneity underlying the chromosome structure that remains cryptic to other techniques also able to induce longitudinal differentation on fish chromosomes. The differences observed in the banding patterns after nick translation procedure seem to be due, at least in part, to differences in activity among the enzymes assayed. The results obtained also reveal some evidence about the origin and evolution of the marker chromosomes of the Atlantic salmon cell line.

Key words

fish chromosomes nick translation RE digestion 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adolph S (1988)In situ nick translation distinguishes between C-band positive regions on mouse chromosomes.Chromosoma 96: 102–106.Google Scholar
  2. Adolph S, Hameister H (1990)In situ nick translation of human metaphase chromosomes with the restriction enzymes MspI and HpaII reveals and R-band pattern.Cytogenet Cell Genet 54: 132–136.Google Scholar
  3. Bianchi MS, Bianchi NO, Pantelias GE, Wolff S (1985) The mechanism and pattern of banding induced by restriction endonucleases in human chromosomes.Chromosoma 91: 131–136.Google Scholar
  4. Bullerdiek J, Dittmer J, Faehre Aet al. (1985) A new banding pattern of human chromosomes byin situ nick translation using EcoRI and biotin-dUTP.Clin Genet 28: 173–176.Google Scholar
  5. Bullerdiek J, Dittmer J, Faehre A, Bartnitzke S (1986) An improved method forin situ nick translation of human chromosomes with biotin 11-labelled dUTP detected by biotinylated alkaline phosphatase.Cytobios 45: 35–43.Google Scholar
  6. Burkholder GD (1989) Morphological and biochemical effects of endonucleases on isolated mammalian chromosomes ‘in vitro’.Chromosoma 97: 347–355.Google Scholar
  7. De la Torre J, Mitchell AR, Sumner T (1991) Restriction endonuclease/nick translation of fixed mouse chromosomes: a study of factors affecting digestion of chromosomal DNAin situ.Chromosoma 100: 203–211.Google Scholar
  8. De la Torre J, Sumner T, Gosálvez J and Stuppia L (1992) The distribution of genes on human chromosomes as studied byin situ nick translation.Genome 35: 890–894.Google Scholar
  9. De la Torre J, López-Fernández C, Herrero P, Gosálvez J (1993)In situ nick translation of meiotic chromosomes to demonstrate homologous heterochromatin heterogeneity.Genome 36: 268–270.Google Scholar
  10. Fernández-Peralta AM, Tagarro I, Ludeña Reyes Pet al. (1991) Time-dependentAluI action on human chromosomes.Genetica 84: 191–194.Google Scholar
  11. Hartley SE (1987) The chromosomes of salmonid fishes.Biol Rev 62: 197–214.Google Scholar
  12. Kerem BS, Goitein R, Diamond G, Cedar H, Marcus M (1984) Mapping of DNaseI sensitive regions on mitotic chromosomes.Cell 38: 493–499.Google Scholar
  13. Kornberg A, Baker TA (1992) DNA polymerase I ofE. coli. In: Kornberg A, Baker TA, eds.DNA Replication. New York: W H Freeman, pp 113–164.Google Scholar
  14. Mezzanotte R, Ferrucci L, Vanni R, Sumner AT (1985) Some factors affecting the action of restriction endonucleases on human metaphase chromosomes.Exp Cell Res 161: 247–253.Google Scholar
  15. Miller DA, Miller OJ (1990) Restriction enzyme banding of metaphase chromosomes. In: Sharma T ed.Trends in Chromosome Research. New York: Springer, pp 338–350.Google Scholar
  16. Miller DA, Choi Y-C, Miller OJ (1983) Chromosome localisation of highly repetitive human DNAs and amplified ribosomal DNA with restriction enzymes.Science 219: 395–397.Google Scholar
  17. Miller DA, Gosden JR, Hastie ND, Evans HJ (1984) Mechanism of endonuclease banding of chromosomes.Exp Cell Res 155: 294–298.Google Scholar
  18. Nicholson BL, Byrne C (1973) An established cell line from the Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar).J. Fish Res Board Can 30: 913–916.Google Scholar
  19. Sánchez L, Abuín M, Amaro R (1993) Cytogenetic characterization of the AS cell line derived from the Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.).Cytogenet Cell Genet 64: 35–38.Google Scholar
  20. Sumner AT (1990) Banding with nucleases. In: Summer AT, ed.Chromosome Banding. London: Unwin Hyman, pp 253–274.Google Scholar
  21. Sumner AT, Taggart MH, Mezzanotte R, Ferrucci L (1990) Patterns of digestion of human chromosomes by restriction endonucleases demonstrated byin situ nick translation.Histochem J 22: 639–652.Google Scholar
  22. Tagarro I, González-Aguilera JJ, Fernández-Peralta AM, De Stefano GF, Ferrucci L (1993) Distribution of TaqI sites along human chromosomes revealed byin situ enzymenick translation.Genome 36: 202–205.Google Scholar
  23. Vig BK (1984) Sequence of centroinere separation: orderly segregation of multicentric chromosomes in mouse L cells.Chromosoma 90: 39–45.Google Scholar
  24. Vig BK, Zinkowski RP (1986) Sequence of centromere separation: a mechanism for orderly separation of dicentrics.Cancer Genet Cytogenet 22: 347–359.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Rapid Communications of Oxford Ltd. 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • María Abuín
    • 1
  • Paulino Martínez
    • 1
  • Laura Sánchez
    • 1
  1. 1.the Departamento de Biología Fundamental, Area de GenéticaUniversidad de Santiago de CompostelaLugoSpain

Personalised recommendations