Skip to main content
Log in

A karyotypic analysis of the lesser Malay chevrotain,Tragulus javanicus (Artiodactyla: Tragulidae)

  • Published:
Chromosome Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Chevrotains are small forest-dwelling ruminants of the family Tragulidae. The chromosome number of the lesser Malay chevrotain was determined to be 2n=32, NF=64. G- and Q-banding allowed the identification of homologous chromosomes, and C-banding demonstrated the presence of pericentromeric, telomeric and interstitial constitutive heterochromatin. Q-band comparisons with domestic cattle revealed relatively few monobrachial chromosome band homologies. However, the smallest biarmed autosome of the chevrotain, chromosome 15, was determined to be cytogenetically homologus with the acrocentric chromosome 19 of cattle. A molecular cytogenetic analysis confirmed this putative chromosomal homology. In fact, molecular cytogenetic analyses indicate complete conservation of synteny among mouse deer chromosome 15, domestic cattle chromosome 19, domestic pig chromosome 12 and human chromosome 17. In the light of these molecular cytogenetic data and since mouse deer chromosome 15 is submetacentric and appears homologous in banding to submetacentric chromosome 12 of the domestic pig, these outgroup comparisons indicate that the acrocentric condition of cattle chromosome 19 has been derived by inversion. Since this derivative condition is present in the Antilocapridae, Bovidae, Cervidae and Giraffidae, it is a chromosomal synapomorphy that unites these advance ruminant families within the Artiodactyla.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Buckland RA, Evans HJ (1978a) Cytogenetic aspects of phylogeny in the Bovidae I. G-banding.Cytogenet Cell Genet 21: 42–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckland RA, Evan HJ (1978b) Cytogenetic aspects of phylogeny in the Bovidae II. C-banding.Cytogenet Cell Genet 21: 64–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cai L, Taylor JF, Wing RA, Gallagher DS, Woo S-S, Davis SK (1995) Construction and characterization of a bovine bacterial artificial chromosome library.Genomics 29: 413–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpio CM, Ponce de Leon FA (1995) Generation of bovine chromosome-specific DNA libraries for autosomes 1,4,14, 20 and 29. Proc 9th N A Colloq Domestic Animal Cytogenetics and Gene Mapping, p. 18. Texas: Texas A & M University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Effron M, Bogart MH, Kumamoto AT, Benirschke K (1976) Chromosome studies in the mammalian subfamily Antilopinae.Genetica 46: 419–444.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans HJ, Buckland RA, Sumner AT (1973) Chromosome homology of heterochromatin in goat, sheep, and ox studied by banding techniques.Chromosoma 42: 383–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fontana F, Rubini M (1990) Chromosomal evolution in Cervidae.Biosystems 24: 157–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher DS Jr, Womack JE (1992) Chromosome conservation in the Bovidae.J Hered 83: 287–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher DS Jr, Derr JN, Womack JE (1994) Chromosome conservation among the advanced pecorans and determination of the primitive bovid karyotype.J Hered 85: 204–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grubb P (1993) Order Artiodactyla. In: Wilson DE & Reeder DM, eds.Mammal Species of the World. 2nd ed. Washington DC, Smithsonian Institution Press, pp. 377–413.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustavsson I (1988) Standard karyotype of the domestic pig: committee for the standardized karyotype of the domestic pig.Hereditas 109: 151–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen KM (1973) Heterochromatin (C-bands) in bovine chromosomes.Hereditas 73: 65–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iannuzzi L, Di Meo GP (1995) Chromosomal evolution in bovids: a comparison of cattle, sheep and goat G-and R-banded chromosomes and cytogenetic divergences among cattle, goat and river buffalo sex chromosomes.Chrom Res 3: 291–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iannuzzi L, Di Berardino D, Gustavsson I, Ferrara L, Di Meo GP (1987) Centromeric loss in translocations of centric fusion type in cattle and river buffalo.Hereditas 106: 73–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • ISCNDA 1989 (1990) International system for cytogenetic nomenclature of domestic animals Di Berardino D, Hayes H, Fries R, Long S (eds).Cytogenet Cell Genet 53: 65–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janis JM, Scott KM (1988) The interrelationships of higher ruminant families with special emphasis on the members of the Cervoidae.novitates 2893: 1–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liming S, Yuze C (1989) The karyotype analysis of the Yunnan mouse deer (Tragulus javanicus williamsoni); ACTAZoological Sinica 35: 41–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendiola JR, Amady S, Buoen LC, Paszek AA, Schook LB, Ponce de Leon FA, Louis CF (1995) Generation of a swine chromosome 6 specific library by microisolation. Proc 9th N A Colloq Domestic Animal Cytogenetics and Gene Mapping, p. 56. Texas: Texas A & M University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nash WG, O'Brien SJ (1982) Conserved regions of homologous G-banded chromosomes between orders in mammalian evolution: carnivores and primates.Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 79: 6631–6635.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petit P, De Meurichy W (1992) Comparative standardized cytogenertic studies in family Giraffidae. Proc 10th Eur Colloq Cytogenetics Domestic Animals, Utrecht University, The Netherlands, pp. 171–177. Utrecht: Utrecht University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinkel D, Straume T, Gray JW (1986) Cytogenetic analysis using quantitative high sensitivity fluourescence hybridization.Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 83: 2934–2938.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reading Conference 1976 (1980) Proceedings of the first international conference for the standardization of banded karyotypes of domestic animals.Hereditas 92: 145–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rettenberger G, Klett C, Zechner U, Kunz J, Vogel W, Hameister H (1995) Visualization of the conservation of synteny between humans and pigs by heterologous chromosomal painting.Genomics 26: 372–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer JR, Hozier JC (1986) High resolution banding of mouse chromosomes: banding conservation between man and mouse.Science 232: 1632–1635.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solinas-Toldo S, Lengauer C, Fries R (1995) Comparative genome map of human and cattle.Genomics 27: 489–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sumner AT (1972) A simple technique for demonstrating centromeric heterochromatin.Exp Cell Res 75: 304–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughan TA (1986)Mammalogy. Philadelphia: Saunders College Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verma and Babu, 1989.Human Chromsomes—Manual of Basic Techniques. Pergamon Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Kiel K, Hameister H, Somissich IE, Adolph S (1985) Early replication banding reveals a strongly conserved functional pattern in mammalian chromosomes.Chromosoma 93: 69–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wurster DH, Benirschke K (1967a) The chromosomes of twenty-three species of the Cervoidea and Bovoidea.Mammal Chrom Newslett 8: 226–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wurster DH, Benirschke K (1967b) Chromosome studies in some deer, the springbok, and the pronghorn, with notes on the placentation in deer.Cytologia 32: 273–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wurster DH, Benirschke K (1968) Chromosome studies in the superfamily Bovid.Chromosoma 25: 152–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yong HS (1973) Complete Robertsonian fusion in the Malayan lesser mouse deer (Tragulus javanicus).Experentia 29: 366–367.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

accepted for publication by David C. Ward

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gallagher, D.S., Houck, M.L., Ryan, A.M. et al. A karyotypic analysis of the lesser Malay chevrotain,Tragulus javanicus (Artiodactyla: Tragulidae). Chromosome Res 4, 545–551 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02261783

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02261783

Key words

Navigation