Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Chromosomal Strategies for Adaptation to Univalency

  • Published:
Chromosome Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The orientation and segregation behaviour of different types of univalents, namely sex chromosomes, B chromosomes and autosomal univalents, were analysed in living spermatocytes of eight evolutionarily distant grasshopper species. The meiotic behaviour of each univalent was characterized in terms of velocity of prometaphase movements, frequency of reorientations, types of final orientation at metaphase I and modes of segregation at anaphase I. All these features were found to vary between different univalents. Certain combinations of these traits, defining a ‘chromosomal strategy’, appear commonly together in certain chromosome types, indicating that they are the result of selection acting on the chromosomes to increase transmission effectiveness. The sex univalents show in general a strategy in which all the features favouring an eventual equational segregation at anaphase I tend to be minimized. There is much more variation in behaviour among B chromosomes than among X chromosomes, which is a reflection of their heterogeneous nature. Induced autosomal univalents are studied in Locusta migratoria. They show a very irregular behaviour, indicating their lack of adaptation to univalency.

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

  • Arana P, Nicklas RB (1992) Orientation and segregation of a micromanipulated multivalent. Familiar principles: divergent outcomes. Chromosoma 101: 399–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ault JG (1984) Unipolar orientation stability of the sex univalent in the grasshopper Melanoplus sanguinipes. Chromosoma 89: 201–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ault JG (1986) Stable versus unstable orientations of sex chromosomes in two grasshopper species. Chromosoma 93: 298–304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ault JG, Nicklas RB (1989) Tension, microtubule rearrangements, and the proper distribution of chromosomes in mitosis. Chromosoma 98: 33–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauer H, Dietz R, Röbbelen C (1961) Die Spermatocytenteilungen der Tipuliden. III. Das Bewegungsverhalten der chromsomen in Translokationheterozygoten von Tipula oleracea. Chromosoma 12: 116–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beukeboom LW (1994) Bewildering Bs: an impression of the 1st B-Chromosome Conference. Heredity 73: 328–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camacho JPM, Cabrero J, López-León MD, Shaw MW (1996) Evolution of a near-neutral B chromosome. In: Henriques-Gil N, Parker JS, Puertas MJ eds. Chromosomes Today, Vol. 12. Chapman & Hall, pp 301–318.

  • Cano MI, Santos JL (1988) B chromosomes of the grasshopper Heteracris littoralis: meiotic behaviour and endophenotypic effects in both sexes. Genome 30: 797–801.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cano MI, Santos JL (1989) Cytological basis of the B chromosome accumulation mechanism in the grasshopper Heteracris littoralis. Heredity 62: 91–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Church K, Lin H-PP (1982) Meiosis in Drosophila melanogaster. II. The prometaphase I kinetochore microtubule bundle and kinetochore orientation in males. J Cell Biol 93: 365–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Church K, Lin H-PP (1985) Kinetochore microtubules and chromosome movement during prometaphase in Drosophila melanogaster spermatocytes studied in life and with the electron microscope. Chromosoma 92: 273–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietz R (1969) Bau und Funktion des Spindelapparates. Naturwissenschafften 56: 237–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein LSB (1981) Kinetochore structure and its role in chromosome orientation during the first meiotic division in male D. melanogaster. Cell 25: 591–602.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henriques-Gil N, Arana P (1990) Origin and substitution of B-chromosomes in the grasshopper Eyprepocnemis plorans. Evolution 44: 747–753.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henriques-Gil N, Arana P, Santos JL (1984a) Factors affecting the meiotic pairing behaviour of B chromosomes in the grasshopper Eyprepocnemis plorans (Acrididae, Orthoptera). Can J Genet Cytol 26: 664–668.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henriques-Gil N, Cano MI, Arana P, Santos JL (1984c) Accessory chromosomes in the grasshopper Heteracris littoralis. Genetics 107(Suppl. 3, PT.2): s46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henriques-Gil N, Santos JL, Arana P (1984b) Evolution of a complex B-chromosome polymorphism in the grasshopper Eyprepocnemis plorans. Chromosoma 89: 290–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henriques-Gil N, Santos JL, Giráldez R (1982) B-Chromosome polymorphism and interchromosomal chiasma interference in Eyprepocnemis plorans (Acrididae, Orthoptera). Chromosoma 85: 349–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollander M, Wolf DA (1973) Nonparametric Statistical Methods. Bradley RA, Hunter JS, Kendall DG, Watson GS (eds). John Wiley & Sons.

  • Janicke MA, LaFountain JR (1989) Centromeric dots in crane-fly spermatocytes: Meiotic maturation and malorientation. Chromosoma 98: 358–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • John B, Lewis KR (1965) The meiotic system. Protoplasmatologia. Vienna: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koshland D (1994) Mitosis: back to the basics. Cell 77: 951–954.

    Google Scholar 

  • López-León MD, Cabrero J, Camacho JPM, Cano MI, Santos JL (1992) A widespread chromosome polymorphism maintained without apparent drive. Evolution 46: 529–539.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews RB, Jones RN (1982) Dynamics of the B-chromosome polymorphism in rye. I. Simulated populations. Heredity 48: 345–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miyazaki WY, Orr-Weaver TL (1994) Sister-chromatid cohesion in mitosis and meiosis. Annu Rev Genet 28: 167–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicklas RB (1961) Recurrent pole-to-pole movements of the sex chromosome during prometaphase I in Melanoplus differentialis spermatocytes. Chromosoma 12: 97–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicklas RB (1971) Mitosis. Adv Cell Biol 2: 225–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicklas RB (1985) Mitosis in eukaryotic cells: an overview of chromosome distribution. In: Dellarco VL, Voytek PE, Hollaender A, eds. Aneuploidy. New York: Plenum Press, pp 183–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicklas RB (1988) Chromosomes and kinetochores do more in mitosis than previously thought. In: Gustafson JP, Appels R, Kaufman RJ (eds) Chromosome Structure and Function: The Impact of New Concepts. New York: Plenum Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicklas RB, Kubai DF (1985) Microtubules, chromosome movement, and reorientation after chromosomes are detached from the spindle by micromanipulation. Chromosoma 92: 313–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicklas RB, Kubai DF, Hays TS (1982) Spindle microtubules and their mechanical associations after micromanipulation in anaphase. J Cell Biol 95: 91–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicklas RB, Ward S (1994) Elements of error correction in mitosis: Microtubule capture, release, and tension. J Cell Biol 126: 1241–1253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pardo MC, Lopez-León MD, Cabrero J, Camacho JPM (1994) Transmission analysis of mitotically unstable chromosomes in Locusta migratoria. Genome 37: 1027–1034.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pluta AF, Mackay AM, Ainzstein AM, Goldberg IG, Earnshaw WC (1995) The centromere: hub of chromosomal activities. Science 270: 1591–1594.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rebollo E, Arana P (1995) A comparative study of orientation at behavior of univalent in living grasshopper spermatocytes. Chromosoma 104: 56–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rebollo E, Arana P (1996) Univalent orientation in living meiocytes. In: Henriques-Gil N, Parker JS, Puertas MJ, eds. Chromosomes Today, Vol. 12. Chapman & Hall, pp 249–269.

  • Rebollo E, Arana P (1998) Chromosomal factors affecting the transmission of univalents. Chromosome Research 6: 67–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rieder CL (1991) Mitosis: towards a molecular understanding of chromosome behavior. Curr Opin Cell Biol 3: 59–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rufas JS, Mazzella C, Garcia de la Vega C, Suja JA (1994) Ultrastructure detection of kinetochores by silver impregnation. Chrom Res 2: 369–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rufas JS, Mazzella C, Suja JA, Garcia de la Vega C (1989) Kinetochore structures are duplicated prior to the first meiotic metaphase. A model of meiotic behavior of kinetochores in grasshoppers. Eur J Cell Biol 48: 220–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santos JL, del Cerro AL, Fernández A, Díez M (1993) Meiotic behaviour of B chromosomes in the grasshopper Omocestus burri: a case of drive in females. Hereditas 118: 139–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skibbens RV, Skeen VP, Salmon ED (1993) Directional instability of kinetochore motility during chromosome congression and segregation in mitotic newt lung cells: A push-pull mechanism. J Cell Biol 122: 859–875.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steffen W (1986) Relationship between the arrangement of microtubules and chromosome behaviour of syntelic autosomal univalents during prometaphase in crane fly spermatocytes. Chromosoma 94: 412–418.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viseras E (1986) Análisis de la naturaleza, efectos y transmisión de los cormosomas accesorios de Locusta migratoria. PhD Thesis, University of Granada.

  • Viseras E, Camacho JP, Cano MI, Santos JL (1990) Relationship between mitotic instability and accumulation of B chromosomes in males and females of Locusta migratoria. Genome 33: 23–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagenaar EB, Bray DF (1973) The ultrastructure of kinetochores of unpaired chromosomes in a wheat hybrid. Can J Genet Cytol 15: 801–806.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf KW (1994) How meiotic cells deal with non-exchange chromosomes. Bioessays 16: 107–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yen TJ, Schaar BT (1996) Kinetochore function: molecular motors, switches and gates. Curr Opin Cell Biol 8: 381–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zurita S, Cabrero J, López-León MD, Camacho JPM (1998) Polymorphism regeneration for a neutralized selfish B chromosome. Evolution 52: 274–277.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departamento de Genética, Facultad de Biología, Universidad Complutense, 28040, Madrid, Spain

    E. Rebollo, S. Manzanero & P. Arana

  2. Departement de Biologie Cellulaire, Sciences III, 30, quai Ernest-Ansermet, CH-1211, Geneve 4, Switzerland

    S. Martín

Authors
  1. E. Rebollo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Martín
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S. Manzanero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. P. Arana
    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

Rebollo, E., Martín, S., Manzanero, S. et al. Chromosomal Strategies for Adaptation to Univalency. Chromosome Res 6, 515–532 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009259804652

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009259804652

Search

Navigation