C-banding and DNA content in seven species of Tenebrionidae (Coleoptera)

Abstract

The relative amount of C-banded heterochromatin varies strikingly in seven species of tenebrionid beetles, from 25 to 58%, but most species show procentric bands only. Nevertheless, Gonocephalum patruele exhibits an almost completely heterochromatic X chromosome. The nuclear DNA content of Feulgen-stained spermatids has yielded up to a threefold difference, from 0.27 to 0.86 pg, which is not completely in accordance with the amount of C-banded heterochromatin. However, the genome sizes correlate significantly with the total chromosome areas at metaphase I and with the spermatid areas. Furthermore, the genome sizes agree with the subfamilial taxonomic groupings of these tenebrionids.Key words: Tenebrionidae, genome size, C-banding.

Karyotype, C-and fluorescence banding pattern, NOR location and FISH study of five Scarabaeidae (Coleoptera) species

“…This pattern of distribution has been described for most coleopteran species studied by C-banding (Virkki, 1983;Rozek and MaryanskaNadachowska, 1991;Rozek and Rudek, 1992), although telomeric blocks in addition to pericentromeric ones have been observed in the tenebrionid Misolampus goudoti (Juan and Petitpierre, 1989) and exclusively telomeric blocks in the carabid Bembidion minimum (Rozek and Rudek, 1992), with extra-heterochromatic segments having been reported in the scarabaeid Bubas bison (Colomba et al, 1996).…”

“…Differential techniques have rarely been applied to chromosome studies of the Coleoptera, but data from the species so far analyzed have shown that the autosomal constitutive heterochromatin (CH) is preferentially located on pericentromeric region and is less frequent on interstitial and telomeric regions while the position of sex chomosome constitutive heterochromatin is more variable in that it may be pericentromeric or entirely heterochromatic (Vidal et al, 1977;Angus, 1983;Drets et al, 1983;Virkki, 1983;Juan and Petitpierre, 1989;Rozek and Lachowska, 2001). Base-specific fluorochromes have provided important information regarding the composition of CH in coleopteran species of the families Tenebrionidae (Juan and Petitpierre, 1989;Plohl et al, 1993) and Scarabaeidae (Colomba et al, 1996;Colomba et al, 2000;Moura et al, 2003).…”

“…Base-specific fluorochromes have provided important information regarding the composition of CH in coleopteran species of the families Tenebrionidae (Juan and Petitpierre, 1989;Plohl et al, 1993) and Scarabaeidae (Colomba et al, 1996;Colomba et al, 2000;Moura et al, 2003). Data regarding the localization of the nucleolar organizer regions (NORs) in the scarab Phyllophaga (Phytalus) vestita and Lyogenys fuscus obtained by silver nitrate staining and flu-orescence in situ hybridization (FISH) have shown that the ribosomal sites are preferentially located on the sex chromosomes (Moura et al, 2003), although in Gymnopleurus sturmi and Phyllophaga (P.) aff capillata (Scarabaeidae), Trotectes intermedius (Geotrupidae), Eriopis connexa (Coccinellidae) and in 19 Zabrus species (Carabidae), the NORs are located on the autosomes (Vitturi et al, 1999;Colomba et al, 2000;Maffei et al, 2000;Sánchez-Géa et al, 2000;Moura et al, 2003).…”

Presence of highly repetitive DNA sequences in Tribolium flour-beetles

“…The Coleoptera constitute the largest animal group with more than 350,000 described species (Lawrence, 1982). The family Tenebrionidae is very conservative in terms of karyological evolution; nearly 60 per cent of the 200 species studied have 2n =20 chromosomes (Juan & Petitpierre, 1990) but some species are known to contain large blocks of heteropycnotic chromatin in meiocytes (Smith, 1952) and variable amounts of C-banding positive chromosomal material (Juan & Petitpierre, 1989). Tenebrio molitor is the only beetle where the satellite DNA has been characterized (Petitpierre et al 1988;Davis & Wyatt, 1989;Ugarkovic et at., 1989).…”

Improving beetle karyotype analysis: restriction endonuclease banding of Tenebrio molitor chromosomes

“…In coleopterans there are relatively few reports of chromosome banding (Ennis, 1974;Angus, 1983;Virkki and Denton, 1987;Juan and Petitpierre, 1989), probably because of the small size of their chromosomes and the poor resolution of longitudinal differentiation obtained with conventional techniques. In most cases, the individual identification of all chromosomes is difficult due to the similarities of size and shape.…”