Conclusions
1. The multivalent configurations in the triploid and tetraploidLycopersicum esculentum are of the types which would be expected, if they were determined by a random distribution of chiasmata.
2. They vary in frequency from cell to cell, but remain statistically constant at successive stages, as they would be expected to do on this assumption.
3. The configurations (contrary to the opinion of previous authors, but as is expected on analogy with all other cases of chiasma pairing) are constant between diplotene and metaphase.
4. The metaphase chiasma frequency is highest in the diploid and lowest in the triploid. This is attributed to a similar difference in original chiasma frequency rather than to a greater reduction in number in the triploid during terminalisation.
5. The curve of variance is higher in the polyploids than in the diploids, as has previously been found inTulipa andHyacinthus.
6. The formation of trivalents and univalents in the triploid gives rise to irregularities in the second division, and to the formation of restitution nuclei.
7. The formation of quadrivalents in the tetraploid leads to numerical non-disjunction which is reflected in reduced fertility.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Afify, A. (1933). “The cytology of the hybrid betweenLycopersicum esculentum andL. racemigerum in relation to its parents.”Genetics,15, 225–39.
Dark, S. O. S. (1931). “Chromosome association in triploidPrimula sinensis.”J. Genet. 25, 91–5.
Darlington, C. D. (1928). “Studies inPrunus. I and II.”19, 213–56.
(1929). “Meiosis in Polyploids. II.”21, 17–53.
(1931). “Meiosis in diploid and tetraploidPrimula sinensis.”24, 65–96.
-- (1932).Recent advances in cytology. London.
Darlington, C. D. andMather, K. (1932). “The origin and behaviour of chiasmata, III. TriploidTulipa.”Cytologia,4, 1–15.
Haldane, J. B. S. (1930). “Theoretical genetics of autopolyploids.”J. Genet. 22, 359–72.
Humphrey, L. M. (1934). “Meiotic divisions of haploid, diploid and tetraploid tomatoes.”Cytologia,5, 278–99.
Jørgensen, C. A. (1928). “Experimental formation of heteroploid plants in the genusSolanum.”J. Genet. 19, 133–211.
Kostoff, D. andKendall, J. (1934). “Studies in polyploid plants. III. Cytogenetics of tetraploid tomatoes.”Gartenbauwiss. 9, 20–44.
La Cour, L. (1931). “Improvements in everyday technique in plant cytology.”J. R. Micr. Soc. 51, 119–26.
Lesley, J. W. andLesley, M. M. (1929). “Chromosome fragmentation and mutation in tomato.”Genetics,14, 321–36.
Lesley, M. M. (1926). “Maturation in diploid and triploid tomatoes.”11, 267–79.
Lesley, M. M. andLesley, J. W. (1930). “Mode of origin and chromosome behaviour in pollen mother-cells of a tetraploid seedling tomato.”J. Genet. 22, 419–25.
Mather, K. (1933). “Relation between chiasmata and crossing-over in diploid and triploidDrosophila melanogaster.”27, 243–59.
McClintock, B. (1930). “Cytological demonstration of the location of an interchange between two non-homologous chromosomes inZea Mays.”Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., Wash.,16, 791–6.
Matsuda, H. (1934). “Cytological studies of the giantPetunia.”Res. Bull. Gifu Coll. Agric. (Japan).
Redfield, H. (1932). “Comparison of triploid and diploid crossing-over for chromosome II ofDrosophila melanogaster.”Genetics,17, 137–52.
Sansome, F. W. (1931). “Graft hybrids and induction of polyploids inSolanum.”Proc. 9th Int. Hort. Cong. pp. 92–99.
(1933). “Chromatid segregation inSolanum Lycopersicum.”J. Genet. 27, 105–32.
Sansome, F. W. andPhilp, J. (1932).Recent advances in Plant Genetics. London.
Stone, L. H. A. andMather, K. (1932). “The origin and behaviour of chiasmata, IV. Diploid and triploidHyacinthus.”Cytologia,4, 16–25.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Upcott, M. The cytology of triploid and tetraploidLycopersicum esculentum . Journ. of Genetics 31, 1–19 (1935). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02982275
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02982275