12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Karyotypes, male meiosis and comparative FISH mapping of 18S ribosomal DNA and telomeric (TTAGG) n repeat in eight species of true bugs (Hemiptera, Heteroptera)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Abstract

          Eight species belonging to five true bug families were analyzed using DAPI/CMA 3-staining and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) with telomeric (TTAGG) n and 18S rDNA probes. Standard chromosomal complements are reported for the first time for Deraeocoris rutilus (Herrich-Schäffer, 1838) (2n=30+2m+XY) and Deraeocoris ruber (Linnaeus, 1758) (2n=30+2m+XY) from the family Miridae. Using FISH, the location of a 18S rDNA cluster was detected in these species and in five more species: Megaloceroea recticornis (Geoffroy, 1785) (2n=30+XY) from the Miridae; Oxycarenus lavaterae (Fabricius, 1787) (2n=14+2m+XY) from the Lygaeidae s.l.; Pyrrhocoris apterus (Linnaeus, 1758) (2n=22+X) from the Pyrrhocoridae; Eurydema oleracea (Linnaeus, 1758) (2n=12+XY) and Graphosoma lineatum (Linnaeus, 1758) (2n=12+XY) from the Pentatomidae. The species were found to differ with respect to location of a 18S rRNA gene cluster which resides on autosomes in Oxycarenus lavaterae and Pyrrhocoris apterus , whereas it locates on sex chromosomes in other five species. The 18S rDNA location provides the first physical landmark of the genomes of the species studied. The insect consensus telomeric pentanucleotide (TTAGG) n was demonstrated to be absent in all the species studied in this respect, Deraeocoris rutilus , Megaloceroea recticornis , Cimex lectularius Linnaeus, 1758 ( Cimicidae), Eurydema oleracea , and Graphosoma lineatum , supporting the hypothesis that this motif was lost in early evolution of the Heteroptera and secondarily replaced with another motif (yet unknown) or the alternative telomerase-independent mechanisms of telomere maintenance. Dot-blot hybridization analysis of the genomic DNA from Cimex lectularius , Nabis sp. and Oxycarenus lavaterae with (TTAGG) n and six other telomeric probes likewise provided a negative result.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 29

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Repeated genes in eukaryotes.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Reverse fluorescent chromosome banding with chromomycin and DAPI.

             D Schweizer (1976)
            Two DNA binding guanine-specific antibiotics, chromomycin A3 (CMA) and the closely related mithramycin (MM), were used as chromosome fluorescent dyes. Root-tip metaphase chromosomes of three plant species and human metaphase chromosomes were sequentially stained with CMA or MM and the DNA binding AT-specific fluorochrome 4'-6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). In some cases a non-fluorescent counterstain was used as contrasting agent: methyl green in conjunction with CMA, and actinomycin D (AMD) in combination with DAPI.--In all three plant species, Vicia faba, Scilla siberica, and Ornithogalum caudatum, the nucleolus organiser regions and/or associated heterochromatin displayed very bright fluorescence with CMA and MM and, in general, heterochromatic segments (C-bands) which were bright with CMA and MM were pale with DAPI whereas segments which were dim with CMA and MM displayed very bright fluorescence with DAPI.--Human metaphase chromosomes showed a small longitudinal differentiation in CMA fluorescence, which was essentially the reverse of the banding pattern obtained with AMD/DAPI double-staining, but of lower contrast. The cma-banding pattern appears to be similar to the pattern found by R-banding procedures.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Systematics and evolution of Heteroptera: 25 years of progress.

              Heteroptera, or true bugs, are part of the most successful radiation of nonholometabolous insects. Twenty-five years after the first review on the influence of cladistics on systematic research in Heteroptera, we summarize progress, problems, and future directions in the field. The few hypotheses on infraordinal relationships conflict on crucial points. Understanding relationships within Gerromorpha, Nepomorpha, Leptopodomorpha, Cimicomorpha, and Pentatomomorpha is improving, but progress within Enicocephalomorpha and Dipsocoromorpha is lagging behind. Nonetheless, the classifications of several superfamily-level taxa within the Pentatomomorpha, such as Aradoidea, Coreoidea, and Pyrrhocoroidea, are still unaffected by cladistic studies. Progress in comparative morphology is slow and drastically impedes our understanding of the evolution of major clades. Molecular systematics has dramatically contributed to accelerating the generation and testing of hypotheses. Given the fascinating natural history of true bugs and their status as model organisms for evolutionary studies, integration of cladistic analyses in a broader biogeographic and evolutionary context deserves increased attention.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Comp Cytogenet
                Comp Cytogenet
                CompCytogen
                Comparative Cytogenetics
                Pensoft Publishers
                1993-0771
                1993-078X
                2011
                9 November 2011
                : 5
                : 4
                : 355-374
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Institute of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Research, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Blvd Tsar Osvoboditel 1, Sofia 1000, Bulgaria
                [2 ]Zoological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Universitetskaya nab. 1, St. Petersburg 199034, Russia
                Author notes
                Corresponding author: S. Grozeva ( sgrozeva@ 123456yahoo.com )

                Academic editor: N. Golub

                Article
                10.3897/CompCytogen.v5i4.2307
                3833783
                24260641
                S. Grozeva, V.G. Kuznetsova, B.A. Anokhin

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                Categories
                Article

                Comments

                Comment on this article