Amounts of nuclear DNA in anurans of the USSR

Mazin, A L

doi:10.1007/bf01953724

Cited by 9 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The second point concerns the underlying biological causes of DNA quantity variation. The most frequently encountered hypotheses in the literature are that the variation has an adaptive basis and is strongly influenced by natural selection (Sparrow et a!., 1972;Cavalier-Smith, 1978, 1980Price et a!., 1981a). The data are primarily the longstanding interspecific correlations observed between genome size and certain biophysical parameters such as cell or nuclear size and minimum meiotic or mitotic cycle times (Bennett, 1971(Bennett, , 1972Szarski, 1974;Cavalier-Smith, 1978;1982).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The data are primarily the longstanding interspecific correlations observed between genome size and certain biophysical parameters such as cell or nuclear size and minimum meiotic or mitotic cycle times (Bennett, 1971(Bennett, , 1972Szarski, 1974;Cavalier-Smith, 1978;1982). Organismal phenotypes used to demonstrate these correlations have included body size, clinal or habitat differences, and several life-history characteristics (Ebeling eta!., 1971;Hinegardner, 1974;Bennett, 1976;Mazin, 1980;Shuter et a!., 1983). Other hypotheses suggested to account for the variation have included organismal specialisation in body form and design (Hinegardner and Rosen, 1972;Hinegardner, 1974Hinegardner, , 1976, accumulations (or losses) of phenotypically inconsequential DNAs (Ohno, 1972;Doolittle and Sapienza, 1980;Orgel and Crick, 1980), and variation in structural gene heterozygosity (Pierce and Mitton, 1980).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Much of the data has been interpreted as supporting the idea that the variation has an adaptive basis and is strongly influenced by natural selection (Sparrow et al, 1972;Cavalier-Smith, 1978;1980;Price et a!., 198 Ia). This in turn has led to suggestions regarding genome size variation and its possible relationship to speciation and phylogeny (Hatch et a!., 1976;Hinegardner, 1976;Cavalier-Smith, 1978).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Other pertinent findings which have emerged are that: (i) increasing organismal specialization in body form and design may often be associated with The underlying causes of genome size variation are not well understood. Much of the data has been interpreted as supporting the idea that the variation has an adaptive basis and is strongly 298 J R. GOLD AND H. JAMES PRICE influenced by natural selection (Sparrow et al, 1972; Cavalier-Smith, 1978;1980; Price et a!., 198 Ia). This in turn has led to suggestions regarding genome size variation and its possible relationship to speciation and phylogeny (Hatch et a!., 1976; Hinegardner, 1976; Cavalier-Smith, 1978).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Genome size variation among north american minnows (Cyprinidae). I. distribution of the variation in five species

1985

Heredity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Genome sizes (nuclear DNA contents) were examined spectrophotometrically from ten individuals of each of five species of North American cyprinid fishes (minnows). The distributions of DNA values both within and between the five species were essentially continuous and normal. Differences between individuals within populations were significant and contributed to approximately 16 per cent of the total variation. Variation between individuals within species ranged from 47-135 per cent and averaged ca. 7•4 per cent. Variation between species ranged from O-95 per cent and the averaie difference between any species pair was Ca. 46 per cent. Statistical analyses showed that the methodology used was sufficient to detect significant differences in genome size as small as 2-3 per cent. Consideration of these data lead to the following tentative conclusions: (i) changes in genome size in cyprinids appear small in amount, frequent in occurrence, to involve both gains and losses of DNA, and to be cumulative and independent in effect; (ii) differences within and between cyprinid taxa are likely the result of accumulations of small changes in DNA quantity; and (iii) the primary focus of quantitative DNA variation in cyprinids is between individuals within populations. The extent of DNA quantity variation which occurs within species would appear to preclude any direct relationship between genome size variation and many of the organismal parameters (including speciation) which differentiate the five species. In short, the data suggest that a significant fraction of the cyprinid genome, perhaps more than 10 per cent, is free to vary quantitatively without phenotypic constraint or biological consequence. This fraction is considerably larger than that theoretically needed for the structural gene component. INTRODUCTIONA long-standing problem in evolutionary genetics regards the quantitative variation in genome size or nuclear DNA content (the C-value) among eukaryotic organisms. Abundant data are now accumulated which show that large, often spectacular differences in genome size commonly occur between even closely related taxa, and that increases in genome size are not necessarily associated with evolutionary advancement (Bachmann et a!., 1972;Rees and Jones, 1972; Hinegardner, 1976;Price, 1976). Early suggestions (Kauffman, 1971) were that the variation was related to either the number of genes in an organism, its organismal complexity, or both. The general concensus now, however, is that there are no significant correlations between genome size (the C-value) and organismal or genetic complexity (Cavalier-Smith, 1978). This is called the C-value paradox. Other pertinent findings which have emerged are that: (i) increasing organismal specialization in body form and design may often be associated with The underlying causes of genome size variation are not well understood. Much of the data has been interpreted as supporting the idea that the variation has an adaptive basis and is strongly 298 J R. GOLD AND H. JAMES PRICE influenced...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Genome size variation among north american minnows (Cyprinidae). I. distribution of the variation in five species

1985

Heredity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The value expressed in absolute units was equal to 8.9 pg because Rana pipiens was considered to have about 10.1 pg. According to Mazin (1980), P. fuscus has a genome size of 7:8 § 0.9 pg. This estimation was based on Xenopus laevis as a standard species (6.3 pg).…”

Section: Genome Size In Pelobates Fuscusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cryptic speciation in Pelobates fuscus (Anura, Pelobatidae): evidence from DNA flow cytometry

Rosanov

Borkin²,

Milto³

et al. 2001

Amphib Reptilia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The amount of nuclear DNA in 173 specimens of Pelobates f. fuscus from 34 localities in Russia, Ukraine, Moldavia and Latvia was determined by DNA ow cytometry. Two distinct groups with different genome sizes were identi ed. The ranges of the genome size variation in the two groups did not overlap. Geographically, these groups with smaller or larger genome size are distributed in the west and in the east of eastern Europe, respectivel y.

show abstract