QUANTITATIVE STUDY OF INTRASPECIFIC VARIATION OF DNA PER CELL INPICEA GLAUCAANDPINUS BANKSIANA

Abstract

Intraspecific variation of DNA per cell was established chemically and cytophotometrically for 17 seed sources of Picea glauca, and cytophotometrically for 11 sources of Pinus banksiana. The DNA Feulgen absorption per cell varied from the lowest to the highest amount by factors of 1.6 and 1.5 for Picea glauca and Pinus banksiana, respectively. Intraspecific DNA also varies with intraspecific nuclear volume. Intraspecific variation of histone was similar to the observed DNA variation. A regression analysis between DNA per cell and latitude provided evidence that eastern and western population series of Picea glauca existed in the seed sources studied. Two-year seedling height growth results demonstrated that eastern seed sources are different from western seed sources. Seedling height in the western provenances varied inversely with DNA content; i.e., seed sources with small DNA per cell displayed greater growth, whereas the eastern sources did not display the inverse relationship between DNA amount and 2-year growth.

Intraspecific variation of nuclear DNA content in plant species

“…This is probably the case of DNA variations in Picea glauca and P. sitchensis (MIKscHE 1968(MIKscHE , 1971) not confirmed by subsequent studies (see BENNETT and SMITH 1976;GREILHUBER 1988).…”

1C Nuclear DNA Content in Pinus koraiensis in Heilongjiang Province, China.

“…1. The ratio of the highest 1C nuclear DNA content to the lowest 1C nuclear DNA content was 1.36, which was lower than the ratio of 1.5, 1.6, 1.7 and 1.9 respectively among the provenances of Pinus banksiana, Picea glauca, Picea sitchensis and Pseudotsuga menziesii (Miksche 1968, 1971, El-Lakany and Sziklai 1971. Dhir and Miksche (1974) observed that the maximum ratio was 2.2 of North red pine (Pinus resinosa) distributed in relatively small geographical distribution.…”

“…Xiaoxingan in Northeast, China. Chromosome number of this species was 2n=24 in correspondence with other species in the genus Pinus, but there were some reports showing that considerable intraspecific and interspecific variation of nuclear DNA content in this genus (Miksche 1968, 1971, Price et al 1973, Dhir and Miksche 1974, Teoh and Rees 1976, Dhillon 1980, Dhillon et al 1978, Ohri and Khoshoo 1986, Wakamiya et al 1993, Wyman et al 1997). Ohri and Khoshoo (1986) observed that the 20 Pinus species widely collected from North America, Europe and Eurasia had a 1.73-fold variation in nuclear DNA content, and noted that Pinus species with very high DNA content distributed in temperate and highly xeric habitats.…”

“…(Teoh and Rees 1976, Ohri and Khoshoo 1968, Wakamiya et al 1993. In sharp contrast to those Pinus species, the increase in nuclear content of Pinus banksiana, Picea glauca, Picea sitchenisi and Pseudostuga meziesii showed a clinical pattern from south to north in the geographic area of species (Miksche 1968, 1971, El-Lakany and Sziklai 1971.It has become evident that nuclear DNA content varies considerably not only among species , but also among and within populations or cultivars of a single species (Bennett and Leitch 1995). This variation in nuclear DNA content was showed to be developmental and adaptive important in life history of plant species via effects on parameters such as nuclear volume, cell volume, mitotic cycle time and duration of meiosis etc.…”

Quantitative nuclear variation in inbred lines and hybrid rye

“…As thepH increases above 81 the staining decreases, and at pH's below 80 nuclear specificity is lost (Bloch, 1966). Since the publication of Alfert and Geschwind's authoritative paper, the fast green staining reaction has found increasing favour for quantitative cytochemical estimations of histone amounts (Bhattacharya, Naylor and Shaw, 1965;Himes, 1967;Miksche, 1968;Kirk and Jones, 1970;Kusanagi and Yanagi, 1970;Ayonoadu and Rees, 1971;Diez and Cionini, 1971;Innocenti, 1971;Moore, 1971). There are in addition some instances where a good agreement has been found for variation in histone amounts determined both by cytochemical means and by biochemical methods (John and Jones, 1970;Kirk, 1972).…”