Chromosome phylogeny of the subfamily Pitheciinae (Platyrrhini, Primates) by classic cytogenetics and chromosome painting

Abstract

BackgroundThe New World monkey (Platyrrhini) subfamily Pitheciinae is represented by the genera Pithecia, Chiropotes and Cacajao. In this work we studied the karyotypes of Pithecia irrorata (2n = 48) and Cacajao calvus rubicundus (2n = 45 in males and 2n = 46 in females) by G- and C-banding, NOR staining and chromosome painting using human and Saguinus oedipus whole chromosome probes. The karyotypes of both species were compared with each other and with Chiropotes utahicki (2n = 54) from the literature.ResultsOur results show that members of the Pitheciinae have conserved several chromosome forms found in the inferred ancestral Platyrrhini karyotype (associations of human homologous segments 3a/21, 5/7a, 2b/16b, 8a/18, 14/15a and 10a/16a). Further, the monophyly of this subfamily is supported by three chromosomal synapomorphies (2a/10b, an acrocentric 15/14 and an acrocentric human 19 homolog). In addition, each species presents several autapomorphies. From this data set we established a chromosomal phylogeny of Pitheciinae, resulting in a single most parsimonious tree.ConclusionsIn our chromosomal phylogeny, the genus Pithecia occurred in a more basal position close to the inferred ancestor of Platyrrhini, while C. c. rubicundus and C. utahicki are closely related and are linked by exclusive synapomorphies.

Neotropical primate evolution and phylogenetic reconstruction using chromosomal data

“…These analyses indicate that the chromosomal differences found among these three taxa are consequences of centric fusions and fissions, pericentric and paracentric inversions, tandem fusions and a Y-autosome translocation; furthermore, these three species are linked by the 2a/10b human association, and Chiropotes and Cacajao are linked by a fission of the ancestral New World association 5/7a (giving association 5a/7a and synteny 5b) and by a fusion leading to the association of human synteny 20/15a/ 14 (Figure 2(c)). It should be noted that the 5/7a fission in pitheciide species and in Atelidae is a homoplasy since it has already been shown that they have different breakpoints (De Oliveira et al 2005;Finotelo et al 2010). In addition, an inversion of the human association 10a/16a has been found in Chiropotes, Pithecia and Cacajao through G banding data analysis; this result apparently is a synapomorphic feature linking all pithecids (including Callicebus) (Finotelo et al 2010), so this association is worthy of further investigation in order to test whether the same breakpoints are shared by the different species.…”

“…It should be noted that the 5/7a fission in pitheciide species and in Atelidae is a homoplasy since it has already been shown that they have different breakpoints (De Oliveira et al 2005;Finotelo et al 2010). In addition, an inversion of the human association 10a/16a has been found in Chiropotes, Pithecia and Cacajao through G banding data analysis; this result apparently is a synapomorphic feature linking all pithecids (including Callicebus) (Finotelo et al 2010), so this association is worthy of further investigation in order to test whether the same breakpoints are shared by the different species.…”

“…Classical and molecular cytogenetics have also been applied to Pithecia irrorata (2n = 48) and Cacajao calvus rubicundus (2n = 45 in males, 2n = 46 in females) using human and Saguinus oedipus whole chromosome probes (Finotelo et al 2010). These analyses indicate that the chromosomal differences found among these three taxa are consequences of centric fusions and fissions, pericentric and paracentric inversions, tandem fusions and a Y-autosome translocation; furthermore, these three species are linked by the 2a/10b human association, and Chiropotes and Cacajao are linked by a fission of the ancestral New World association 5/7a (giving association 5a/7a and synteny 5b) and by a fusion leading to the association of human synteny 20/15a/ 14 (Figure 2(c)).…”

Genomic Mapping of Human Chromosome Paints on the Threatened Masked Titi Monkey <i>(Callicebus personatus)</i>

“…Molecular cytogenetic methods, including chromosome painting, have been used to compare karyotypes to find chromosomal homologies that may be used for phylogenetic reconstruction of the Platyrrhini [Richard et al, 1996;Neusser et al, 2001;De Oliveira et al, 2002;Ruiz-Herrera et al, 2005;Amaral et al, 2008;Finotelo et al, 2010]. To date, however, only 3 Callicebus species have been investigated by painting methods: C. pallescens with 2 different karyotypes [Stanyon et al, 2000;Barros et al, 2003;Dumas et al, 2005], C. lugens [Stanyon et al, 2003] and C. cupreus [Dumas et al, 2005].…”

The evolution of human synteny 4 by mapping sub-chromosomal specific probes in Primates

“…The different positions of the probe signal in the two lineages can be explained as the result of a large pericentromeric inversion or of the occurrence of a Figure 2. We considered the literature regarding Strepsirrhini (Müller et al 1997;Richard et al 2000;Cardone et al 2002;Stanyon et al 2002Stanyon et al , 2006Warter et al 2005;Nie et al 2006;Rumpler et al 2008), Platyrrhini (Consigliere et al 1996(Consigliere et al , 1998Richard et al 1996;Morescalchi et al 1997;Stanyon et al 2000Stanyon et al , 2001Stanyon et al , 2003Stanyon et al , 2004Neusser et al 2001;Garcia et al 2002, De Oliveira et al 2002, 2005Barros et al 2003;Serreau et al 2004;Dumas et al 2005Dumas et al , 2007Ruiz-Herrera et al 2005;Amaral et al 2008;Finotelo et al 2010), and Catarrhini Wienberg et al 1992;Bigoni, Koehler, Stanyon, Ishida, et al 1997;Bigoni, Koehler, Stanyon, Morescalchi, et al 1997;Nie et al 1998;Finelli et al 1999;Nie et al 2001;Ruiz-Herrera et al 2002;Müller et al 2003;Bigoni et al 2003Bigoni et al , 2004Stanyon et al 2005;Moulin et al 2008) in order to reconstruct the hy...…”