2016
DOI: 10.1007/s13353-016-0369-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Similarities and differences in the nuclear genome organization within Pooideae species revealed by comparative genomic in situ hybridization (GISH)

Abstract: In this paper, we highlight the affinity between the genomes of key representatives of the Pooideae subfamily, revealed at the chromosomal level by genomic in situ hybridization (GISH). The analyses were conducted using labeled probes from each species to hybridize with chromosomes of every species used in this study based on a “round robin” rule. As a result, the whole chromosomes or chromosome regions were distinguished or variable types of signals were visualized to prove the different levels of the relatio… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The set of our CGH experiments aimed to compare genomes among the different notopterid genera ( Xenomystus , Papyrocranus,Notopterus , and Chitala ), suggest an advanced stage of sequence divergence, except fot the bright signals, highly likely corresponding to NOR sites (as might be compared with previous rDNA FISH analysis 9 ). Such result is typical for distantly related or substantially diverged genomes, see 67,68 ). The decrease of shared sequences is hardly surprising considering the ancient time of divergence between the clades.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 69%
“…The set of our CGH experiments aimed to compare genomes among the different notopterid genera ( Xenomystus , Papyrocranus,Notopterus , and Chitala ), suggest an advanced stage of sequence divergence, except fot the bright signals, highly likely corresponding to NOR sites (as might be compared with previous rDNA FISH analysis 9 ). Such result is typical for distantly related or substantially diverged genomes, see 67,68 ). The decrease of shared sequences is hardly surprising considering the ancient time of divergence between the clades.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 69%
“…Clone 395, derived from the library representing the most frequently present sequences in the F. pratensis genome, was labeled by nick translation with fluorochrome Atto647 (Jena BioScience) (Majka et al 2017b ). The ribosomal sequence 35S rDNA was labeled with digoxigenin-11-dUTP by nick translation.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The development of recent molecular methologies has allowed a qualitative improvement on chromosome researches of different biological taxa. Among them, the genomic in situ hybridization (GISH) and comparative genomic hybridization (CGH), originally developed for clinical studies (Kallioniemi et al, 1992 ), are now successfully applied for several other purposes, such as the identification of parental genomes in hybrids/allopolyploids (Bi and Bogart, 2006 ; Knytl et al, 2013 ; Symonová et al, 2013a , 2015 ; Doležálková et al, 2016 ; Majtánová et al, 2016 ), the detection of sex-specific content on homomorphic sex chromosomes (Ezaz et al, 2006 ; Altmanová et al, 2016 ; Rovatsos et al, 2016 ; Freitas et al, 2017 ) and the genome comparisons among related species (Valente et al, 2009 ; Symonová et al, 2013b ; Majka et al, 2016 ; Carvalho et al, 2017 ; Moraes et al, 2017 ). All these (and many other) studies proved that GISH and CGH technologies, despite representing rather “rough” molecular tools, may be successful in providing clues about the genome evolution, with their resolution being based on the differential distribution of already divergent genome-specific repetitive DNA classes (Kato et al, 2005 ; Chester et al, 2010 ), as these sequences are generally highly abundant in eukaryotic genomes and display faster evolutionary rates than the single-copy ones (Charlesworth et al, 1994 ; Cioffi and Bertollo, 2012 ; López-Flores and Garrido-Ramos, 2012 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%