2005
DOI: 10.1007/s00412-004-0323-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Genome size and chromatin condensation in vertebrates

Abstract: Cell membrane-dependent chromatin condensation was studied by flow cytometry in erythrocytes of 36 species from six classes of vertebrates. A positive relationship was found between the degree of condensation and genome size. The distribution of variances among taxonomic levels is similar for both parameters. However, chromatin condensation varied relatively more at the lower taxonomic levels, which suggests that the degree of DNA packaging might serve for fine-tuning the 'skeletal' and/or 'buffering' function… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
22
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 74 publications
2
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The non-coding DNA was also supposed to play a 'buffering' role, damping the effect of solvent fluctuations on the nuclear machinery (Vinogradov 1998a). Recently, it was shown in comparison of two closely related amphibian species differing in genome size that chromatin condensation was steadier and its reaction to changes in solvent composition (caused by elevated extracellular salinity) was more inertial in species with the larger genome, which is in agreement with the buffering model (Vinogradov 2005a). The ability of DNA to act as 'buffer' to control the concentration of DNA-binding proteins and smaller solutes was even used for the development of experimental methods for investigation of histone-DNA interaction and DNA thermostability (Thastrom et al 2004;Volker & Breslauer 2005).…”
Section: K4supporting
confidence: 70%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The non-coding DNA was also supposed to play a 'buffering' role, damping the effect of solvent fluctuations on the nuclear machinery (Vinogradov 1998a). Recently, it was shown in comparison of two closely related amphibian species differing in genome size that chromatin condensation was steadier and its reaction to changes in solvent composition (caused by elevated extracellular salinity) was more inertial in species with the larger genome, which is in agreement with the buffering model (Vinogradov 2005a). The ability of DNA to act as 'buffer' to control the concentration of DNA-binding proteins and smaller solutes was even used for the development of experimental methods for investigation of histone-DNA interaction and DNA thermostability (Thastrom et al 2004;Volker & Breslauer 2005).…”
Section: K4supporting
confidence: 70%
“…The redundant non-coding DNA is supposed to serve for adjustment of metabolic rate mediated by a change in general cellular parameters (such as nuclear size, chromatin condensation, nucleocytoplasmic ratio), which in multicellulars can be independent of body size (Szarski 1983;Cavalier-Smith 1985;Vinogradov 1995Vinogradov , 1997Vinogradov , 1998aGregory 2002;Kozlowski et al 2003;Olmo 2003;Vinogradov & Anatskaya 2004;Vinogradov 2005a). The link between genome size and metabolic rate can be considered as an example of the symmorphosis, a general principle of evolutionary biology defined as a quantitative match of structural design and functional demand (Weibel et al 1991;Diamond & Hammond 1992;Weibel 2000).…”
Section: K4mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The size of the presumed loops depends on the distance of cohesion sites and determines the degree of compaction. If the degree of compaction increases with genome size (Vinogradov 2005), larger genomes might have fewer cohesion sites and larger loops between them, possibly yielding positional separation along sister chromatids with a higher probability than, for instance, in budding yeast . However, during prophase sister chromatids are continuously aligned and the distance between FISH signals on sister chromatids becomes very small or not resolvable by light microscopy.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…
So far, investigation of the relationship between DNA content and different parameters, such as chromatin density, chromosome structure, chromosome size, nuclear size and cell size using different methods such as serial thin sectioning and three-dimensional reconstructing techniques (Bennett et al, 1983), microspectrofl uorometry, cytophotometry and confocal microscopy (Baluška and Kubica, 1992;Melaragno et al, 1993;Gray et al, 1999) has led to contradictory conclusions.For vertebrates, an increase in chromatin condensation with increasing genome size has been reported (Vinogradov, 2005). A comparison between DNA content per nucleus and the total volume of metaphase chromosomes in several plant species suggested that DNA density might vary even within a species (for review see Bennett and Leitch, 2005).
…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%