A comparative karyological study of the blue-breasted quail (<i>Coturnix chinensis</i>, Phasianidae) and California quail (<i>Callipepla californica</i>, Odontophoridae)

Abstract

We conducted comparative chromosome painting and chromosome mapping with chicken DNA probes against the blue-breasted quail (Coturnix chinensis, CCH) and California quail (Callipepla californica, CCA), which are classified into the Old World quail and the New World quail, respectively. Each chicken probe of chromosomes 1–9 and Z painted a pair of chromosomes in the blue-breasted quail. In California quail, chicken chromosome 2 probe painted chromosomes 3 and 6, and chicken chromosome 4 probe painted chromosomes 4 and a pair of microchromosomes. Comparison of the cytogenetic maps of the two quail species with those of chicken and Japanese quail revealed that there are several intrachromosomal rearrangements, pericentric and/or paracentric inversions, in chromosomes 1, 2 and 4 between chicken and the Old World quail. In addition, a pericentric inversion was found in chromosome 8 between chicken and the three quail species. Ordering of the Z-linked DNA clones revealed the presence of multiple rearrangements in the Z chromosomes of the three quail species. Comparing these results with the molecular phylogeny of Galliformes species, it was also cytogenetically supported that the New World quail is classified into a different clade from the lineage containing chicken and the Old World quail.

FISH on avian lampbrush chromosomes produces higher resolution gene mapping

“…The discrepancy between the present data and the earlier reported data (Shibusawa et al, 2001(Shibusawa et al, , 2004aSchmid et al, 2005) can be easily explained. Since the short arm of chicken chromosome 4 represents an ancestral microchromosome (Shibusawa et al, 2002;Guttenbach et al, 2003;Derjusheva et al, 2004;Itoh & Arnold, 2005), precise assignment of chicken 4p molecular markers by FISH to metaphase chromosomes seems to be a bit tricky.…”

“…FISH results showed no rearrangements in quail chromosomes 3 and 5 and conformed with the inversions described earlier on quail chromosomes 1 and 2 as compared to the homologous chicken chromosomes (Shibusawa et al, 2001(Shibusawa et al, , 2004aSchmid et al, 2005). Previous data obtained using FISH to mitotic chromosomes suggested that chicken and quail chromosomes 4 differ by a pericentric inversion.…”

“…Cross-species FISH also presents an opportunity for genome evolution studies. Comparative chromosome painting applied to chromosomes of avian species belonging to diverse orders (Shetty, Griffin & Graves, 1999;Schmid et al, 2000;Raudsepp et al, 2002;Shibusawa et al, 2002Shibusawa et al, , 2004aGuttenbach et al, 2003;Kasai et al, 2003;Derjusheva et al, 2004;Itoh & Arnold, 2005) shows high conservation of synteny. More detailed analysis indicates that this conservation is mainly due to a low number of interchromosomal rearrangements (Crooijmans et al, 2001;International Chicken Genome Sequencing Consortium, 2004).…”

Comparison of the Chromosome Structures between the Chicken and Three Anserid Species, the Domestic Duck (<i>Anas platyrhynchos</i>), Muscovy Duck (<i>Cairina moschata</i>), and Chinese Goose (<i>Anser cygnoides</i>), and the Delineation of their Karyotype Evolution by Comparative Chromosome Mapping

“…Furthermore, comparative chromosome mapping has enabled us to identify intrachromosomal rearrangements, which cannot be detected precisely by chromosome painting. However, comparative chromosome mapping with functional genes and/or cytogenetic DNA markers has been performed for a few avian species (including the California condor, domestic duck, flycatchers, Guinea fowl, Japanese quail, New World quails, turkey, and zebra finch) (Shibusawa et al, 2001(Shibusawa et al, , 2002(Shibusawa et al, , 2004aItoh et al, 2006;Fillon et al, 2007;Stapley et al, 2008;Modi et al, 2009;Skinner et al, 2009;Backström et al, 2010;Zhang et al, 2011). Therefore, a lack of information of intrachromosomal rearrangements between different species makes it difficult to delineate the process of avian karyotype evolution precisely.…”

The molecular basis of chromosome orthologies and sex chromosomal differentiation in palaeognathous birds

“…Cross-species chromosome hybridization (termed Zoo-FISH) and subsequent comparative gene mapping delineates accurately the chromosomal orthologies between distantly related species and the chromosome rearrangements that have occurred during evolution. Comparative chromosome painting in birds with chicken probes has been performed for over 30 species in at least nine orders (Shetty et al 1999, Schmid et al 2000, Raudsepp et al 2002, Guttenbach et al 2003, Kasai et al 2003, Derjusheva et al 2004, Shibusawa et al 2004a, b, Itoh & Arnold 2005, de Oliveria et al 2005, Nanda et al 2006, reviewed in Griffin et al 2007). …”