A First Karyological Analysis of the Sand Goby, <i>Oxyeleotris marmoratus</i> (Teleostei, Eleotridae) in Thailand by Ag-NOR Staining Technique

Abstract

SummaryThe standardized karyotype and idiogram of the sand goby (Oxyeleotris marmoratus) from Chi River in the Maha Sarakham Province of northeastern Thailand were studied. Kidney cell samples were taken from five male and five female fish. The mitotic chromosome preparations were prepared by blood cell culture and directly from kidney cells. Conventional and Ag-NOR staining techniques were applied to stain the chromosomes. The results showed that the diploid chromosome number of O. marmoratus was 2n = 46 and the fundamental number (NF) as 50 in both males and females. The types of chromosomes were 2 large submetacentric, 10 large telocentric, 2 medium metacentric and 32 medium telocentric chromosomes. No strange-sized chromosomes related to sex were observed. The region adjacent to the telomere of chromosome pair 7 showed clearly observable secondary constriction/NORs. The karyotype formula for O. marmoratus could be inferred as: 2n (diploid) 46 = L 2 sm +L t 10 +M 2 m +M t 32

Sex Chromosomes and Internal Telomeric Sequences in Dormitator latifrons (Richardson 1844) (Eleotridae: Eleotrinae): An Insight into Their Origin in the Genus

“…To date, cytogenetic data on Eleotridae scantly describe the diploid number for 11 species ( Table 1 ), barely representing 6.4% of the species ascribed to the family. The karyotype of D. latifrons was already described [ 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 ], but the information provided is limited to the diploid number and the karyotype composition. Data from C-bands and active nucleolus organizer regions (Ag-NORs) are limited to other two species of the family, D. maculatus and Eleotris pisoni [ 28 , 29 ].…”

Which Is a Reliable Approach in the Generation of Artificial Minichromosomes, Bottom-Up or Top-Down?

“…Cytogenetical and karyotypic studies have revealed variations of chromosomes in size, morphology, and number in various clades of plant and animal species (Al-Dakan and Al-Saleh 2015, Al-Qahtani et al 2014, Arslan and Zima 2014, Bagane et al 2014, Çakmak and Koca 2014, Deshpande et al 2014, El-Esawi and Sammour 2014, Gholave et al 2014, Haroun and Alotaibi 2015, Jantarat et al 2014a, Kaewmad et al 2014, 2014c, Kantek et al 2015, Kasiroek et al 2014, Kaur and Singhal 2015, Khakhong et al 2014, Kumar et al 2015, Kumar et al 2014, Li et al 2015, Martin et al 2015, Miura and Iwatsubo 2014, Parai and Mukherjee 2014, Park 2015, Patawang et al 2014a, Phimphan et al 2015, Pierozzi and Baroni 2014, Pinthong et al 2014, Qumsiyeh et al 2014, Rezaei et al 2014, Samanta et al 2015, Sato et al 2015, Tahami et al 2014, Venkatesh and Munirajappa 2015, Venkatesh et al 2014, Walia et al 2015. Cytogenetical techniques including banding methods and FISH have revealed the evolutionary process in structural and number changes of chromosomes (Lombello and Pinto-maglio 2014…”