4.1 Article

Comparative Cytogenetics Among Three Sympatric Hypostomus Species (Siluriformes: Loricariidae): An Evolutionary Analysis in a High Endemic Region

期刊

出版社

INST TECNOLOGIA PARANA
DOI: 10.1590/1678-4324-2018180417

关键词

Armored catfish; FISH; Iguacu river; karyotype evolution

类别

资金

  1. CAPES (Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior)
  2. Fundacao Araucaria (Fundacao Araucaria de Apoio ao Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico do Estado do Parana)
  3. CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The karyotypes of three armored catfish species (Loricariidae) from the Iguacu river, southern of the Brazil, were compared using different techniques: C-banding, Ag-NOR and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), which used 5S and 18S rDNAs and total C(o)t-1 fraction as probes. Hypostomus commersoni and Hypostomus derbyi presented 2n = 68 chromosomes, with karyotype formulae 12m+12sm+14st+30a and 12m+12sm+10st+34a, respectively; whereas Hypostomus myersi presented 2n = 74 chromosomes and 12m+16sm+12st+34a. The chromosomal localization of the Ag-NORs, 5S and 18S rDNAs differed in number of sites and chromosomal localization among the studied species. The total C(o)t-1 probe permitted the visualization of the repetitive DNA fraction in karyotypes of each species. Cross-hybridizations using total C(o)t-1 probe revealed that these species have repetitive DNAs in common. However, this does not occur in H. commersoni in relation to the other species. The apparent karyotype similarity suggests a close relationship between the sympafric H. commersoni and H. derbyi species, but the small differences detected in the examined chromosomal markers indicate evolutionary divergence due to gene flow restriction among them. Hence, the present findings indicate different composition of repetitive sequences among studied species, which permit to infer its role in chromosomal differentiation of Hypostomus.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据