Journal of Molecular Evolution

, Volume 33, Issue 1, pp 76–82 | Cite as

Chondrichthyan cytogenetics: A comparison with teleosteans

  • Vincenzo Stingo
  • Lucia Rocco
Article

Summary

Cytogenetic studies on cartilaginous fish conducted in recent years have shown that these vertebrates have peculiarities associated both with the karyotypes and the size and composition of their DNAs. Although the data for this group, which includes about 1000 extant species, are still fragmentary, there appear to be more differences than similarities with teleosts; e.g., chromosome sets are characterized by a high diploid number (2n=up to 106) and are often rich in acrocentric elements and in microchromosomes. From the quantitative standpoint, chondrichthyan genomes are relatively large (2C=up to 34 pg DNA/n), exhibiting sometimes wide interspecific variability (Squalidae).

The few studies on genome composition for these species have revealed marked difference between chondrichthyans and teleosteans in the ratio of the amount of GC-rich DNA to the total increase in genome. Moreover, thermal denaturation of the genomes of six selachians revealed derived curves that are characteristic of heterogeneity in nucleotide distribution, which has not been evidenced in most of the teleosteans investigated thus far.

Finally, for the first time in selachians, an investigation was conducted using restriction enzymes, the results of which showed a pattern of chromosome labeling that was in some cases (Alu I) similar to and in others (Hae III, Hind III) different from that of teleosteans.

Key words

Chondrichthyes Cytogenetics DNA Chromosomes DNA base pair composition Chromosome banding 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Amemiya CT, Gold JR (1988) Chromosomal NORs as taxonomic and systematic characters in North American cyprinid fishes. Genetica 76:81–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernardi G, Bernardi G (1990) Compositional patterns in the nuclear genomes of cold-blooded vertebrates. J Mol Evol 31: 265–281PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bianchi SM, Bianchi ON, Pantelias EG, Wolff S (1985) The mechanism and pattern of banding induced by restriction endonucleases in human chromosomes. Chromosoma 91:131–136CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Capriglione T, Olmo E, Odierna G, Smith DI, Miller OJ (1989) Genome composition and tandemly repetitive sequence at some centromeres in the lizardPodarcis s. sicula Raf. Genetica 79:85–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cau A, Salvadori S, Deiana AM, Bella JL, Mezzanotte R (1988) Characterization ofMuraena helena L. mitotic chromosomes: karyotype, C-banding, nucleolar organizer regions, andin situ digestion with restriction endonucleases. Cytogenet Cell Genet 47:223–226Google Scholar
  6. Compagno LJV (1973) Interrelationships of living elasmobranchs. In: Greenwood PH, Miles RS, Patterson C (eds) Interrelationships of fishes. Academic Press, New York, p 25Google Scholar
  7. Compagno LJV (1977) Phyletic relationships of living sharks and rays. Am Zool 17:303–322Google Scholar
  8. Gold JR, Karel WJ (1988) DNA base composition and nucleotide distribution among fifteen species of teleostean fishes. Comp Biochem Physiol 90B:715–719Google Scholar
  9. Gosline WA (1971) Functional morphology and classification of teleostean fishes. University Press, Hawaii, Honolulu, p 1Google Scholar
  10. Greenwood PH, Rosen DE, Weitzman SH, Myers GS (1966) Phyletic studies of teleostean fishes with a provisional classification of living forms. Bull Am Mus Hist 131:339–456Google Scholar
  11. Hinegardner RT (1976) The cellular DNA content of sharks, rays and some other fishes. Am Nat 102:517–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hinegardner RT (1977) Evolution of genome size. In: Ayala FJ (ed) Molecular evolution. Sinauer, Sunderland MA, p 179Google Scholar
  13. Holmquist GP (1989) Evolution of chromosome bands: molecular ecology of noncoding DNA. J Mol Evol 28:468–486Google Scholar
  14. Hudson AP, Cuny G, Cortadas J, Haschmeyer AEV, Bernardi G (1980) An analysis of fish genomes by density gradient centrifugation. Eur J Biochem 112:203–210CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Kaelbling M, Miller AD, Miller JO (1984) Restriction enzyme banding of mouse metaphase chromosomes. Chromosoma 90:128–132CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Karel WJ, Gold JL (1987) A thermal denaturation study of genome DNAs from North-American minous (Cyprinidae, Teleostei). Genetica 74:181–187CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Lima-de-Faria A, Isaksson M, Olsson E (1980) Action of restriction endonucleases on the DNA and chromosomes ofMuntiacus muntjak. Hereditas 92:267–273PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Lloyd MA, Thorgaard GH (1988) Restriction endonuclease banding of rainbow trout chromosomes. Chromosoma 96: 171–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Medrano L, Bernardi G, Couturier J, Dutrillaux B, Bernardi G (1988) Chromosome banding and genome compartimentalization in fishes. Chromosoma 96:178–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Miller DA, Choi J, Miller JO (1983) Chromosome localization of highly repetitive human DNA's and amplified ribosomial DNA with restriction enzymes. Science 219:395–397PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Ohno S (1974) Animal cytogenetics. In: Chordata, I, vol 4. Gebruder Borntraeger, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  22. Ojima Y (1983) Fish cytogenetics. In: Sharma AK, Sharma A (eds) Chromosomes in evolution of eukaryotic groups. CRC Press, Boca Raton FL, pp 112–145Google Scholar
  23. Olmo E, Stingo V, Odierna G, Capriglione T (1980) Cryptic polyploidy in sharks and rays as revealed by DNA denaturation kinetics. Atti Accad Naz Linc 48:555–560Google Scholar
  24. Olmo E, Stingo V, Odierna G, Capriglione T (1982a) Sequence organization in the DNA of three selachians. Experientia 38: 339–340CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Olmo E, Stingo V, Cobror O, Capriglione T, Odierna G (1982b) Repetitive DNA and polyploidy in selachians. Comp Biochem Physiol 73B:739–745Google Scholar
  26. Pizon V (1983) Organisation des sequences nucleotidiques dans les genomes de poissons. These de 3e cycle, Universite Paris VIGoogle Scholar
  27. Schaeffer B (1967) Comments on elasmobranchs evolution. In: Gilbert PW, Mathewson RF, Rall DP (eds), Sharks, skates and rays. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, p 3Google Scholar
  28. Schmid M, de Almeida CG (1988) Chromosome banding in Amphibia. Chromosoma 96:283–290CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Schwartz FJ, Maddock MB (1986) Comparisons of karyotypes and cellular DNA contents within and between major lines of elasmobranch. In: Uyeno T, Arai R, Taniuchi T, Matsuura K (eds) Indo-Pacific fish biology. Ichthyological Society Japan, Tokyo, p 148Google Scholar
  30. Stingo V (1979) New developments in vertebrate cytotaxonomy. II. The chromosomes of the cartilaginous fishes. Genetica 50:227–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Stingo V, Capriglione T (1986) DNA and chromosomal evolution in cartilaginous fish. In: Uyeno T, Arai R, Taniuchi T, Matsuura K (eds) Indo-Pacific fish biology. Ichthyological Society Japan, Tokyo, p 140Google Scholar
  32. Stingo V Capriglione T, Rocco L, Improta R, Morescalchi A (1989a) Genome size and A-T rich DNA in selachians. Genetica 79:197–205Google Scholar
  33. Stingo V, Rocco L, Improta R (1989b) Chromosome markers and karyology of selachians. J Exp Zool 2[suppl]:175–185Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vincenzo Stingo
    • 1
  • Lucia Rocco
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Evolutive and Comparative BiologyUniversity of NaplesNaplesItaly

Personalised recommendations