Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Meiosis IV: Segregation from interchange multivalents as a Markov process

  • Published:
Genetica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A new model is adduced in explanation of known segregation ratios from quadrivalents and related multivalents. A Markov process consisting of the following three steps is proposed: (A) geometric ordering of centromeres (or other reference points) with respect to each other during ontogeny. (B) presegregation of the oriented centromeres into two sets: in quadrivalents the two sets would consist either of two pairs or of one three-group and one separate centromere. (C) segregation of each presegregated group of centromeres independently, or not, of the other one. Three examples in which presegregated sets of centromeres segregate independently of each other are analyzed using diagram descriptions, matrices and path coefficients.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Battaglia, E. & J. Boyes (1955). Post-reduction meiosis: its mechanism and causes.Caryologia 8: 87–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, H., R. Dietz & C. Röbbelen (1961). Die Spermatocytenteilungen der Tipuliden. III Mitteilung. Das Bewegungsverhalten der Chromosomen in Translokationsheterozygoten vonTipula oleracea.Chromosoma 12: 116–189.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M. S. (1940). The relation between chiasma formation and disjunction.Univ. of Texas Publ. 4032: 11–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham, C. R. (1932). An interchange in maize giving low sterility and chain configurations.Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. Wash. 18: 434–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham, C. R. (1934). Cytogenetic studies of an interchange between chromosomes 8 and 9 in maize.Genetics 19: 430–447.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham, C. R. (1950). Chromosome segregation in translocations involving chromosome 6 in maize.Genetics 35: 446–481.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burnham, C. R. (1956). Chromosomal interchanges in plants.Bot. Rev. 22: 419–552.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham, C. R. (1962). Discussions in cytogenetics. Burgess Publ. Co., Minneapolis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darlington, C. D. (1936). Crossing over and its mechanieal relationships inChorthippus andStauroderus.J. Genetics 33: 465–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darlington, C. D. (1937). Recent advances in cytology. P. Blakiston's Son & Co., Philadelphia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobzhansky, T. (1930). Translocation involving the third and fourth chromosomes ofDrosophila melanogaster.Genetics 15: 347–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobzhansky, T. (1931). Translocation involving the second and fourth chromosomes ofDrosophila melanogaster.Genetics 16: 629–658.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, L. T. (1962). Experimental on morphological variation in the cestode genusHymenolepis. VI Somatic pairing of chromosomes in normal and mutant strains ofH. diminuta.Exp. Parasitol. 12: 134–154.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, L. T. (1968a). Matrix and path coefficient solutions of tri- and quadrivalents.Genetica 39: 456–496.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, L. T. (1968b). Solution ofHaplopappus hexavalents by superposition of presegregation canonics (manuscript).

  • Douglas, L. T. & S. J. Geerts (1966). Meiosis, II: A modified affinity model in mice.Genetica 37: 511–542.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forer, A. (1966). Characterization of the mitotic traction system, and evidence that birefringent spindle fibers neither produce nor transmit force for chromosome movement.Chromosoma 19: 44–98.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Glass, H. B. (1935). A study of factors influeneing chromosomal segregation in translocations ofDrosophila melanogaster.Missouri Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Bull. 231: 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grell, R. F. (1962). A new model for secondary non-disjunction: The role of distributive pairing.Genetics 47: 1737–1754.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grell, R. F. (1964). Chromosome size at distributive pairing inDrosophila melanogaster females.Genetics 50: 151–166.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haga, T. (1943). A reciprocal translocation inLillium hansonii Leicht.Cytologia 13: 19–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huches-Schrader, S. (1943). Polarization, kinetochore movements, and bivalent structure in the meiosis of male mantids.Biol. Bull. 85: 265–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huxley, H. & J. Hanson (1960). The molecular basis of contraction in cross-striated muscles. In: Structure and function of muscle (Bourne, G., Ed.)1: 183–227. Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inuoé, S. & A. Rajer (1961). Birefringence in endosperm mitosis.Chromosoma 12: 48–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inuoé, S. (1953). Polarization optical studies of the mitotic spindle. I. The demonstration of spindle fibers in living cells.Chromosoma 5: 487–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • John, B & K. R. Lewis (1965). The meiotic system.Protoplasmatologia 6: F1 1–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A., J. Dvorak, M. Hossain, J. Huffman, C. Hutchins, D. Jones & R. Kisner (1963). Host-relationships of radiation-induced mutant strains ofHymenolepis diminuta.Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 113: 343–359.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kemeny, J. & J. Snell (1960). Finite Markov chains. D. van Nostrand Co., Inc., Princeton, N. J.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorbeer, G. (1934). Die Zytologie der Lebermoose mit besonderer Berücksichtigung allgemeiner Chromosomenfragen.Jahrb. f. wiss. Bot. 80: 567–817.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicklas, R. B. (1966). A note on orientation in mitosis and meiosis.J. Theoret. Biol. 12: 147–150.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Novitski, E. (1964). An alternative to the distributive pairing hypothesis inDrosophila.Genetics 50: 1449–1451.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pipkin, S. (1940). Segregation and crossing over in a 2, 3 translocation inDrosophila melanogaster.Univ. of Texas Pub. 4032: 73–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, M. M. (1936). Structural hybridity inLilium martagon album × L. hansonii.J. Genetics 32: 411–450.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rickards, G. K. (1964). Some theoretical aspects of selective segregation in interchange complexes.Chromosoma 15: 140–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rickards, G. K. (1965). An analysis of coorientation in mitosis and meiosis.J. Theoret. Biol. 9: 332–349.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schrader, F. (1954). Mitose, Franz Deuticke, Vienna.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shult, E. E. & C. C. Lindegren (1957). Orthoorientation: a new tool for genetical analysis.Genetica 29: 58–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sybenga, J. (1968). Orientation of interchange multiples inSecale cereale.Heredity 23: 73–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, M. (1958). Experimental evidence for a new genetic phenomenon.Proc. Roy. Phil. Soc. (London) B. 241: 211–251.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Genetics, University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    L. T. Douglas

Authors
  1. L. T. Douglas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Douglas, L.T. Meiosis IV: Segregation from interchange multivalents as a Markov process. Genetica 39, 429–455 (1968). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02324480

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02324480

Keywords

Search

Navigation