Karyotypic evolution and phylogenetic relationships in the order Chiroptera as revealed by G-banding comparison and chromosome painting

Ao, Lei; Mao, Xiuguang; Nie, Wei; Gu, Xiaoming; Feng, Qi; Wang, Jinhuan; Su, Wencheng; Wang, Yingxiang; Volleth, Marianne; Yang, Fengtang

doi:10.1007/s10577-007-1120-7

Cited by 27 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Comparisons of chromosome banding patterns support the hypothesis that Robertsonian and tandem chromosomal fusions were the main events in the karyotype evolution of Chiroptera, and the reduced chromosomal number found in some species of phyllostomid and molossid bats may have resulted from such events (Morielle-Versute et al, 1996;de Faria and Morielle-Versute, 2006;Ao et al, 2006Ao et al, , 2007Mao et al, 2008).…”

supporting

confidence: 60%

Short CommunicationNew insights into telomeric DNA sequence (TTAGGG)n location in bat chromosomes

Faria¹,

Marchesin²,

Moreira³

et al. 2009

Genet. Mol. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Molossidae species, Cynomops abrasus (2n = 34, fundamental number, FN = 64), Eumops auripendulus (2n = 42, FN = 62), Molossus rufus (2n = 48, FN = 64), Molossops temminckii (2n = 48, FN = 64), and Nyctinomops laticaudatus (2n = 48, FN = 64), and Phyllostomidae species, Phyllostomus discolor (2n = 32, FN = 60), have karyotypes with different chromosome and fundamental numbers, different localization of constitutive heterochromatin, and different numbers and location of nucleolar organizer regions (NORs). Fluorescence in situ hybridization with a human probe of the telomeric sequence (TTAGGG) n produced fluorescent signals in telomeric regions of the six bat species' chromosomes; in E. auripendulus, pericentromeric signals were also observed in the acrocentric and subtelocentric chromosomes. A relationship between telomeric sequences and NORs, and

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 60%

Short CommunicationNew insights into telomeric DNA sequence (TTAGGG)n location in bat chromosomes

Faria¹,

Marchesin²,

Moreira³

et al. 2009

Genet. Mol. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most of the rearrangements responsible for repatterning chiropteran genomes involve centric or Robertsonian fusions (29,30), which, unless in monobrachial combinations (31), are perceived as not being particularly underdominant (i.e., possessing heterozygous disadvantage). So, perhaps such rearrangements occasionally do survive as polymorphic states for considerable lengths of time, although this would also depend on historical variables including effective population size and spatial population structure.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hemiplasy and homoplasy in the karyotypic phylogenies of mammals

Robinson

Ruiz‐Herrera

Avise

2008

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phylogenetic reconstructions are often plagued by difficulties in distinguishing phylogenetic signal (due to shared ancestry) from phylogenetic noise or homoplasy (due to character-state convergences or reversals). We use a new interpretive hypothesis, termed hemiplasy, to show how random lineage sorting might account for specific instances of seeming ''phylogenetic discordance'' among different chromosomal traits, or between karyotypic features and probable species phylogenies. We posit that hemiplasy is generally less likely for underdominant chromosomal polymorphisms (i.e., those with heterozygous disadvantage) than for neutral polymorphisms or especially for overdominant rearrangements (which should tend to be longer-lived), and we illustrate this concept by using examples from chiropterans and afrotherians. Chromosomal states are especially powerful in phylogenetic reconstructions because they offer strong signatures of common ancestry, but their evolutionary interpretations remain fully subject to the principles of cladistics and the potential complications of hemiplasy.cladistics ͉ gene trees ͉ lineage sorting ͉ phylogeny ͉ species trees I n phylogenetic analyses, systematists routinely strive to distinguish homology (trait similarity due to shared ancestry) from homoplasy (trait similarity arising from evolutionary convergence, parallelism, or character-state reversals). Homology can offer valid phylogenetic signal, whereas homoplasy is regarded as evolutionary noise that, if not properly accommodated, jeopardizes phylogenetic reconstructions. Homology itself has distinct components, as first emphasized by Hennig (1) in his insightful distinction between symplesiomorphies (traits showing sharedancestral homology) and synapomorphies (traits with sharedderived homology). From a Hennigian perspective, only valid synapomorphies properly earmark clades.The critical distinctions between homoplasy and homology and between different kinds of homology have served the field of systematics well. However, a difficulty arises when a sharedderived genetic trait that from mechanistic considerations should be homoplasy-free nonetheless recurs in two or more taxa that seem to be unrelated. For example, suppose that a derived chromosomal inversion with presumably unique (monophyletic) endpoint breaks is present in two or more species that belong to disparate clades. Under the traditional interpretive framework outlined above, this phylogenetic dilemma could only be resolved in either of two ways: by supposing that the inversion has evolved multiple times independently, notwithstanding mechanistic karyotypic arguments to the contrary; or by supposing that the shared trait does earmark a bona-fide organismal clade, notwithstanding independent phylogenetic evidence to the contrary.Here, we raise another potential explanation for this kind of phylogenetic enigma, and illustrate its application to karyotypic data involving chromosomal syntenies in mammals. Each synteny is a large conserved block of DNA, i.e., a linked assembla...

show abstract

“…Combined with G-banding data, paints have documented chromosomal rearrangements and homologies among 8 bat families and contributed considerably to the elucidation of evolutionary relationships among this diverse group [Volleth et al, 1999[Volleth et al, , 2002Pieczarka et al, 2005;Ao et al, 2006Ao et al, , 2007Mao et al, , 2008. Thus, in the present work we performed multidirectional chromosome painting with whole chromosome probes made from the karyotypes of Carollia brevicauda (2n = 21, XY 1 Y 2 ) and from Phyllostomus hastatus (2n = 32, XX) onto the respective karyotypes of D. ecaudata , D. youngi and D. rotundus to elucidate chromosomal homologies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Chromosomal Homologies among Vampire Bats Revealed by Chromosome Painting (Phyllostomidae, Chiroptera)

Sotero-Caio

Pieczarka

Nagamachi

et al. 2010

Cytogenet Genome Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Substantial effort has been made to elucidate karyotypic evolution of phyllostomid bats, mostly through comparisons of G-banding patterns. However, due to the limited number of G-bands in respective karyotypes and to the similarity of non-homologous bands, an accurate evolutionary history of chromosome segments remains questionable. This is the case for vampire bats (Desmodontinae). Despite several proposed homologies, banding data have not yet provided a detailed understanding of the chromosomal changes within vampire genera. We examined karyotype differentiation of the 3 species within this subfamily using whole chromosomal probes from Phyllostomus hastatus (Phyllostominae) and Carollia brevicauda (Carolliinae). Painting probes of P. hastatus respectively detected 22, 21 and 23 conserved segments in Diphylla ecaudata, Diaemus youngi, and Desmodus rotundus karyotypes, whereas 27, 27 and 28 were respectively detectedwith C. brevicauda paints. Based on the evolutionary relationships proposed by morphological and molecular data, we present probable chromosomal synapomorphies for vampire bats and propose chromosomes that were present in the common ancestor of the 5 genera analyzed. Karyotype comparisons allowed us to relate a number of conserved chromosomal segments among the 5 species, providing a broader database for understanding karyotype evolution in the family.

show abstract

Karyotypic evolution and phylogenetic relationships in the order Chiroptera as revealed by G-banding comparison and chromosome painting

Cited by 27 publications

References 29 publications

Short CommunicationNew insights into telomeric DNA sequence (TTAGGG)n location in bat chromosomes

Short CommunicationNew insights into telomeric DNA sequence (TTAGGG)n location in bat chromosomes

Hemiplasy and homoplasy in the karyotypic phylogenies of mammals

Chromosomal Homologies among Vampire Bats Revealed by Chromosome Painting (Phyllostomidae, Chiroptera)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About