Variability of genome size in conifers under extreme environmental conditions

Седельникова, Т. С.

doi:10.1134/s2079086416020079

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These values are higher than in previous reports for P. mugo: 42.56 ± 0.79, ranging from 41.08 to 43.95 pg (Morse et al 2009) and lower for P. sylvestris: 49.25 ± 2.65 pg (Valkonen et al 1994). However, it is assumed that growth conditions, especially altitude, can change the DNA content in the nuclear genome of plants (Sedelnikova 2016). The impact of this factor can be ruled out in this study due to the lack of significant differences in altitude between the analyzed samples.…”

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 68%

“…Genome size is important in the context of possible taxonomical relationship among the closely-related taxa of pine species, especially in combination with quantitative (chromosome length, asymmetric indices) and qualitative (Cbanding) cytogenetic data. 2C DNA content is considered to be a useful parameter in different areas of species biology (Bennett and Leitch 2011;Sedelnikova 2016). According to Sedelnikova (2016) the variability in the content of DNA in the genus Pinus is related to its taxonomic position.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2C DNA content is considered to be a useful parameter in different areas of species biology (Bennett and Leitch 2011;Sedelnikova 2016). According to Sedelnikova (2016) the variability in the content of DNA in the genus Pinus is related to its taxonomic position.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cytological characterization of three closely related pines - Pinus mugo, P. uliginosa and P. × rhaetica from the Pinus mugo complex (Pinaceae)

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Pinus mugo complex comprises closely related pines in different taxonomic ranks, which commonly occur in major European mountain chains. This large and polymorphic complex has been, and still is, a considerable challenge for taxonomists due to highly variable phenotypical characteristics within particular taxa, ongoing hybridization in sympatric populations, lack of distinct morphological species-specific determinants, and the absence of distinct genetic differentiation among them. Moreover, cytogenetic data on pines from this complex are very scarce. Therefore, in this study, we used C-banding methods and flow cytometric analysis in order to provide new data on karyotypical features and DNA content of three closely-related pines from the Pinus mugo complex, i.e., Pinus mugo (Turra), Pinus uliginosa (Neumann), and Pinus × rhaetica (Brügger) and to gain more insight into the taxonomic relationships between these pines. Our results confirmed that the basic number of chromosome is the same amongst the analyzed taxa (2n = 2x = 24), and that the karyotypes have a similar morphology. The number of secondary constrictions (SCs) and C-banding patterns differed slightly between P. mugo, P. uliginosa and P. × rhaetica. The nuclear DNA content (2C/pg) among analyzed taxa is from 46.41 pg for P. mugo and P. × rhaetica to 46.48 pg for P. uliginosa. For each of these pines, certain taxa-specific cytogenetic determinants were identified. Our results indicate that they may represent two different taxa, and so their names should not be used interchangeably in scientific literature.

show abstract

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 68%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cytological characterization of three closely related pines - Pinus mugo, P. uliginosa and P. × rhaetica from the Pinus mugo complex (Pinaceae)

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Biology —Examples of extreme events include: Behavior of partially unfolded proteins under extreme temperature and pressure conditions (Heremans 2004 ); Transformation of the genome size in conifers (trees used as the source of softwood, resins, and turpentine) growing in an extreme environment (Sedel’nikova 2016 ); Extreme biology of meteorites (Lee et al 2017 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%