Abstract
Possible classes of spatial ordering between chromosomal components of multivalents and their motion with respect to each other are deduced on the basis of the propositions: (A) that the proximity of centromeres, or similar reference centers, to each other determines which chromosomes are to migrate to opposite poles, irrespective of homology and (B) that segregation from multivalents proceeds as a Markov process consisting of at least three steps taking place during or prior to metaphase I. Segregation matrices constructed from data on the (relative) poles to which chromosomes in a quadrivalent may proceed, taken together with proposition (A), permit deducing possible classes of spatial ordering between elements within multivalents early in meiotic prophase. Transient and ergodic states of centromere ordering are compared to resonance interaction between electrons within single molecules.
Outcomes deduced by the method here correspond with many of those proposed in the literature, but some do not. Some of the conclusions are as follows. For trivalents, any one of the three centromeres, or similar reference points, may locate geometrically between the other two early in meiotic prophase and coorient with them both. In some types of quadrivalents the four reference points (centromeres, for example) first separate into cooriented pairs (= presegregation) each of which then segregates independently, or not, of the other pair. In some segregation modes of other quadrivalent types, three of the four centromeres evidently behave as a trivalent, coorienting and segregating independently of the fourth element.
It is argued that structures known to be present during later states of meiosis (e.g. chiasmata) cannot, alone, account for observed segregation ratios.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bauer, H., R. Diete & C. Röbbelen (1961). Die Spermatocytenteilungen der Tipuliden. III Mitteilung. Das Bewegungsverhalten der Chromosomen in Translokationsheterozygoten vonTipula oleracea.Chromosoma 12: 116–189.
Bergner, A. D., S. Satina & A. F. Blakeslee. (1933). Prime types inDatura.Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. Wash. 19: 103–115.
Burnham, C. R. (1932). An interchange in maize giving low sterility and chain configurations.Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. Wash. 18: 434–440.
Burnham, C. R. (1934). Cytogenetic studies of an interchange between chromosomes 8 and 9 in maize.Genetics 19: 430–447.
Burnham, C. R. (1950). Chromosome segregation in maize translocations involving chromosome 6 in maize.Genetics 35: 446–481.
Burham, C. R. (1956). Chromosomal interchanges in plants.Bot. Rev. 22: 419–552.
Burnham, C. R. (1962). Discussions in Cytogenetics. Burgess Publishing Co. Minneapolis.
Burnham, C. R., F. White & R. Livers (1954). Chromosome interchanges in barley.Cytologia 19: 191–202.
Darlington, C. D. (1937). Recent Advances in Cytology. P. Blakiston's son and Co., Philadelphia.
Douglas, L. T. (1966). Meiosis, I: Association of non-homologous bivalents during spermatogenesis in white mice.Genetica 37: 466–480.
Douglas, L. T. (1968a). Meiosis, III: The elastica and Markov segregation as basis for distributive pairing inDrosophila.Genetica 39: 280–326.
Douglas, L. T. (1968b). Meiosis. IV: Segregation from interchange multivalents as a Markov process.Genetica 30: 429–455.
Douglas, L. T. (1968c). Meiosis, VI: Meiotic sequence of the first two waves of spermatogenesis in young male mice (manuscript).
Douglas, L. T. (1968d). Solution ofHaplopappus hexavalents by superpositions of presegregation canonics (manuscript).
Douglas, L. T. (1968e). Neo-two-plane permutations at presegregation and centromere affinity as basis for meiotic drive (manuscript).
Eberle, P. (1966). Die Chromosomenstruktur des Menschen in Mitosis und Meiosis. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart.
Erickson, J. (1965). Meiotic drive inDrosophila involving chromosome breakage.Genetics 51: 555–571.
Glass, H. B. (1935). A study of factors influencing chromosomal segregation in translocations ofDrosophila melanogaster.Missouri Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Bull. 231: 1–28.
Grell, R. F. (1964a). Chromosome size at distributive pairing inDrosophila melanogaster females.Genetics 50: 151–166.
Grell, R. F. (1964b). Distributive pairing; the size-dependent mechanism responsible for regular segregation of the fourth chromosomes inDrosophila melanogaster.Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. Wash. 52: 226–232.
Grell, R. F., E. Muñoz & W. Kirschbaum (1966). Radiation — induced nondisjunction and loss of chromosomes inDrosophila melanogaster females. I The effect of chromosome size.Mutation Res. 3: 494–502.
Haga, T. (1943). A reciprocal translocation inLillium hansonii Leicht.Cytologia 13: 19–25.
Hamerton, J. L., V. Cowie, F. Giannelli & S. Briggs (1961). Differential transmission of Down's syndrome (mongolism) through male and female translocation carriers.Lancet 2: 956–968.
Hamerton, J. L. (1965). Chromosome segregation in three human interchanges. In: Chromosomes Today, C. D. Darlington & K. R. Lewis (Ed.), Oliver & Boyd, London. (pp. 257–252).
Hustinx, Th. W. J. (1966). Cytogenetisch onderzoek bij enige families. Thesis Univ. Nijmegen; Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
John, B & K. R. Lewis (1965). The meiotic system. Protoplasmatologia6: F1, 1–335.
Kasha, K. J. & C. R. Burnham (1965). The location of interchange breakpoints in barley. II. Chromosome pairing and the intercross method.Can. J. Genet. Cytol. 7: 620–632.
King, R. L., A. Rubinson & R. Smith (1956). Oogenesis in adultDrosophila melanogaster.Growth 20: 121–157.
Lachance, L. E., J. G. Riemann & D. E. Hopkins (1964). A reciprocal translocation inCochlyomyia hominivorax (Diptera: Calliphoridae). Genetic and cytological evidence for preferential segregation in males.Genetics 40: 959–972.
Lorbeer, G. (1934). Die Zytologie der Lebermoose mit besonderer Berück-sichtigung allgemeiner Chromosomenfragen.Jahrb. f. wiss. Bot. 80: 567–817.
Maguire, M. P. (1964). Crossing over and anaphase I distribution of the chromosomes of a maize interchange trivalent.Genetics 40: 69–80.
Maguire, M. P. (1965). The relationship of crossover frequency to synaptic exient at pachytene in maize.Genetics 51: 23–40.
Moens, P. (1964). A new interpretation of meiotic prophase inLycopersicon esculentum (tomato).Chromosoma 15: 231–242.
Nicklas, R. B. (1966). A note on orientation in mitosis and meiosis.J. Theovet. Biol. 12: 147–150.
Novitski, E. (1964). An alternative to the distributive pairing hypothesis inDrosophila.Genetics 50: 1449–1451.
Ohno, S., L. Christian & C. Stenius. (1963). Significance in mammalian oögenesis of the non-homologous association of bivalents.Exp. Cell. Res. 32: 590–621.
Peacock, W. J. (1965). Nonrandom segregation of chromosomes inDrosophila males.Genetics 51: 573–583.
Rickards, G. K. (1964). Some theoretical aspects of selective segregation in interchange complexes.Chromosoma 15: 140–155.
Rhoades, M. M. (1936). A cytogenetic study of a chromosome fragment in maize.Genetics 21: 491–502.
Robertis, E., W. Nowinski & F. Saez. (1960). General cytology. W. B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia.
Sandler, L. & E. Novitski (1957). Meiotic drive as an evolutionary force.Am. Nat. 91: 105–110.
Slack, H. (1938). The association of non-homologous chromosomes in theCorixidae (Hemiptera-Heteroptera).Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh 58: 192–212.
Swanson, C. P., T. Merz & W. J. Young (1967). Cytogenetics. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Sybenga, J. (1966). The quantitative analysis of chromosome pairing and chiasma formation based on the relative frequencies of MI configulations. V. Interchange trisomics.Genetica 37: 481–510.
Syrkin, Y. & M. Dyatkina (1964). Structure of molecules and the chemical bond. Dover Pub., Inc., New York.
Yerganian, G. (1963). Chromosome cytology of medical anomalies in radiation induced chromosomal aberrations (S. Wolff, Ed.) Columbia Univ. Press, New York.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Douglas, L.T. Meiosis V: Matric and path coefficient solutions of tri- and quadrivalents. Genetica 39, 456–496 (1968). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02324481
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02324481