COLCHICINE INDUCED BIVALENT PAIRING OF TETRAPLOID MICROSPOROCYTES IN TRITICUM LONGISSIMUM AND T. SPELTOIDES

1976 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 731-738 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lydia Avivi
Keyword(s):  
Colchicine Treatment ◽  
Meiotic Pairing ◽  
Homologous Chromosomes ◽  
Sister Chromatids ◽  
Naturally Occurring ◽  
Or Genes

The low-pairing gene or genes of diploid Triticum longissimum (Schwinf. &Muschl.) Bowden predispose the induced autotetraploid towards bivalent pairing. In this work, bivalentization was phenocopied in intermediate- and low-pairing lines of T. longissimum and in a high-pairing line of T. speltoides (Tausch) Gren. ex Richter, by colchicine treatment during the last premeiotic mitosis. This treatment induced C-mitosis and tetraploid cells which are characterized by almost exclusive bivalent pairing instead of the expected multivalent pairing. Colchicine disrupted the association of homologous chromosomes in the premeiotic metaphase but left the sister chromatids located close to each other. As a result, rather than being all closely associated, the four homologues were arranged in pairs already prior to meiosis. The effect of colchicine in this respect is reminiscent of that of the "diploidizing genes" in many naturally occurring polyploids. This work demonstrates once again the significance which the pattern of premeiotic homologous association has for the manner of meiotic pairing.

Effect of the Pairing Gene Ph1 and Premeiotic Colchicine Treatment on Intra- and Interchromosome Pairing of Isochromosomes in Common Wheat

Genetics ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 150 (3) ◽  
pp. 1199-1208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan M Vega ◽  
Moshe Feldman
Keyword(s):  
Common Wheat ◽  
Homologous Chromosome ◽  
Colchicine Treatment ◽  
Crossing Over ◽  
Meiotic Pairing ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Homologous Chromosomes ◽  
Polyploid Wheat ◽  
Main Gene ◽  
Ph1 Gene

Abstract The analysis of the pattern of isochromosome pairing allows one to distinguish factors affecting presynaptic alignment of homologous chromosomes from those affecting synapsis and crossing-over. Because the two homologous arms in an isochromosome are invariably associated by a common centromere, the suppression of pairing between these arms (intrachromosome pairing) would indicate that synaptic or postsynaptic events were impaired. In contrast, the suppression of pairing between an isochromosome and its homologous chromosome (interchromosome pairing), without affecting intrachromosome pairing, would suggest that homologous presynaptic alignment was impaired. We used such an isochromosome system to determine which of the processes associated with chromosome pairing was affected by the Ph1 gene of common wheat—the main gene that restricts pairing to homologues. Ph1 reduced the frequency of interchromosome pairing without affecting intrachromosome pairing. In contrast, intrachromosome pairing was strongly reduced in the absence of the synaptic gene Syn-B1. Premeiotic colchicine treatment, which drastically decreased pairing of conventional chromosomes, reduced interchromosome but not intrachromosome pairing. The results support the hypothesis that premeiotic alignment is a necessary stage for the regularity of meiotic pairing and that Ph1 relaxes this alignment. We suggest that Ph1 acts on premeiotic alignment of homologues and homeologues as a means of ensuring diploid-like meiotic behavior in polyploid wheat.

Putative diploid ancestors of 80-chromosome Glycine tabacina

Genome ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 140-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. J. Singh ◽  
K. P. Kollipara ◽  
F. Ahmad ◽  
T. Hymowitz
Keyword(s):  
Adventitious Roots ◽  
Chromosome Doubling ◽  
Colchicine Treatment ◽  
Meiotic Pairing ◽  
B Genome ◽  
Specific Hybridization ◽  
A Genome ◽  
Genome Homology ◽  
Glycine Tabacina ◽  
Natural Mutation

The objective of this study was to discover the diploid progenitors of 80-chromosome Glycine tabacina with adventitious roots (WAR) and no adventitious roots (NAR). Three synthetic amphiploids were obtained by somatic chromosome doubling. These were (i) (G. latifolia, 2n = 40, genome B1B1,) × (G. microphylla, 2n = 40, genome BB) = F1(2n = 40, genome BB1) – 0.1% colchicine treatment (CT) – 2n = 80, genome BBB1B1; (ii) (G. canescens, 2n = 40, genome AA) × G. microphylla, 2n = 40, genome BB) = F1 (2n = 40, genome AB) – (CT) – 2n = 80, genome AABB; (iii) (G. latifolia, 2n = 40, B1B1) × G. canescens, 2n = 40, AA) = F1 (2n = 40, genome AB1) – (CT) – 2n = 80, genome AAB1B1. The segmental allotetraploid BBB1B1 was morphologically similar to the 80-chromosome G. tabacina (WAR), but meiotic pairing data in F1 hybrids did not support the complete genomic affinity. Despite normal diploid-like meiosis in allotetraploids AABB and AAB1B1, AABB was completely fertile, while pod set in AAB1B1 was very sparse. Morphologically, allotetraploid AABB was indistinguishable from the 80-chromosome G. tabacina (NAR) but in their F1 hybrids, the range of univalents at metaphase I was wide (4–44). The allotetraploid AAB1B1 did not morphologically resemble the 80-chromosome G. tabacina (NAR). However, the F1 hybrid of AABB × AAB1B1 showed normal meiosis with an average chromosome association (range) of 1.7 I (0–4) + 39.2 II (38–40). Based on this information, we cannot correctly deduce the diploid progenitor species of the 80-chromosome G. tabacina (NAR). The lack of exact genome homology may be attributed to the geographical isolation, natural mutation, and growing environmental conditions since the inception of 80-chromosome G. tabacina. Thus, it is logical to suggest that the 80-chromosome G. tabacina (NAR) is a complex, probably synthesized from A genome (G. canescens, G. clandestina, G. argyrea, G. tomentella D4 isozyme group) and B genome (G. latifolia, G. microphylla, G. tabacina) species, and the 80-chromosome G. tabacina (WAR) complex was evolved through segmental allopolyploidy from the B genome species.Key words: Glycine spp., allopolyploidy, colchicine, genome, intra- and inter-specific hybridization, polyploid complex.

Inferences from genetical evidence on the course of meiotic chromosome pairing in plants

1977 ◽  
Vol 277 (955) ◽  
pp. 313-326 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Chromosome Pairing ◽  
Developmental Stages ◽  
Meiotic Chromosome ◽  
Critical Assessment ◽  
Gene Control ◽  
Meiotic Pairing ◽  
Homologous Chromosomes ◽  
Meiotic Chromosome Pairing ◽  
Combined Use ◽  
Or Gene

Meiotic chromosome pairing is a process that is amenable to genetic and experimental analysis. The combined use of these two approaches allows for the process to be dissected into several finite periods of time in which the developmental stages of pairing can be precisely located. Evidence is now available, in particular in plants, that shows that the pairing of homologous chromosomes, as observed at metaphase I, is affected by events occurring as early as the last premeiotic mitosis; and that the maintenance of this early determined state is subsequently maintained by constituents (presumably proteins) that are sensitive to either colchicine, temperature or gene control. A critical assessment of this evidence in wheat and a comparison of the process of pairing in wheat with the course of meiotic pairing in other plants and animals is presented.

scholarly journals Kinetochore Fibers Are Not Involved in the Formation of the First Meiotic Spindle in Mouse Oocytes, but Control the Exit from the First Meiotic M Phase

1999 ◽  
Vol 146 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stéphane Brunet ◽  
Angélica Santa Maria ◽  
Philippe Guillaud ◽  
Denis Dujardin ◽  
Jacek Z. Kubiak ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Polar Body ◽  
Meiotic Spindle ◽  
Homologous Chromosomes ◽  
Mouse Oocytes ◽  
Sister Chromatids ◽  
M Phase ◽  
Continuous Presence ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Polar Body Extrusion ◽  
Reductional Division

During meiosis, two successive divisions occur without any intermediate S phase to produce haploid gametes. The first meiotic division is unique in that homologous chromosomes are segregated while the cohesion between sister chromatids is maintained, resulting in a reductional division. Moreover, the duration of the first meiotic M phase is usually prolonged when compared with mitotic M phases lasting 8 h in mouse oocytes. We investigated the spindle assembly pathway and its role in the progression of the first meiotic M phase in mouse oocytes. During the first 4 h, a bipolar spindle forms and the chromosomes congress near the equatorial plane of the spindle without stable kinetochore– microtubule end interactions. This late prometaphase spindle is then maintained for 4 h with chromosomes oscillating in the central region of the spindle. The kinetochore–microtubule end interactions are set up at the end of the first meiotic M phase (8 h after entry into M phase). This event allows the final alignment of the chromosomes and exit from metaphase. The continuous presence of the prometaphase spindle is not required for progression of the first meiotic M phase. Finally, the ability of kinetochores to interact with microtubules is acquired at the end of the first meiotic M phase and determines the timing of polar body extrusion.

scholarly journals Inverted meiosis: an alternative way of chromosome segregation for reproduction

2020 ◽  
Vol 52 (7) ◽  
pp. 702-707 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenzhu Li ◽  
Xiangwei He
Keyword(s):  
Dna Replication ◽  
Fission Yeast ◽  
Chromosome Segregation ◽  
Chromosome Structure ◽  
Adaptive Strategy ◽  
Homologous Chromosomes ◽  
Working Model ◽  
Sister Chromatids ◽  
Holocentric Chromosome ◽  
Inverted Order

Abstract Canonical meiosis is characterized by two sequential rounds of nuclear divisions following one round of DNA replication—reductional segregation of homologous chromosomes during the first division and equational segregation of sister chromatids during the second division. Meiosis in an inverted order of two nuclear divisions—inverted meiosis has been observed in several species with holocentromeres as an adaptive strategy to overcome the obstacle in executing a canonical meiosis due to the holocentric chromosome structure. Recent findings of co-existence of inverted and canonical meiosis in two monocentric organisms, human and fission yeast, suggested that inverted meiosis could be common and also lead to the puzzle regarding the mechanistic feasibility for executing two meiosis programs simultaneously. Here, we discuss apparent conflicts for concurrent canonical meiosis and inverted meiosis. Furthermore, we attempt to provide a working model that may be compatible for both forms of meiosis.

scholarly journals Three-dimensional Ultrastructure of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Meiotic Spindles

2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 1178-1188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Winey ◽  
Garry P. Morgan ◽  
Paul D. Straight ◽  
Thomas H. Giddings ◽  
David N. Mastronarde
Keyword(s):  
Saccharomyces Cerevisiae ◽  
Meiotic Chromosome ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Structural Basis ◽  
Mitotic Spindles ◽  
Yeast Saccharomyces Cerevisiae ◽  
Homologous Chromosomes ◽  
Sister Chromatids ◽  
Single Nucleus ◽  
Meiotic Spindles

Meiotic chromosome segregation leads to the production of haploid germ cells. During meiosis I (MI), the paired homologous chromosomes are separated. Meiosis II (MII) segregation leads to the separation of paired sister chromatids. In the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, both of these divisions take place in a single nucleus, giving rise to the four-spored ascus. We have modeled the microtubules in 20 MI and 15 MII spindles by using reconstruction from electron micrographs of serially sectioned meiotic cells. Meiotic spindles contain more microtubules than their mitotic counterparts, with the highest number in MI spindles. It is possible to differentiate between MI versus MII spindles based on microtubule numbers and organization. Similar to mitotic spindles, kinetochores in either MI or MII are attached by a single microtubule. The models indicate that the kinetochores of paired homologous chromosomes in MI or sister chromatids in MII are separated at metaphase, similar to mitotic cells. Examination of both MI and MII spindles reveals that anaphase A likely occurs in addition to anaphase B and that these movements are concurrent. This analysis offers a structural basis for considering meiotic segregation in yeast and for the analysis of mutants defective in this process.

DISTRIBUTION AND CYTOLOGY OF ELYMUS MACOUNII VASEY

1960 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. T. H. Gross
Keyword(s):  
Colchicine Treatment ◽  
Naturally Occurring ◽  
Hordeum Jubatum ◽  
Agropyron Trachycaulum ◽  
Cross Fertilization ◽  
Prairie Provinces

The distribution of Elymus macounii Vasey in the Prairie Provinces of Canada is extensive and apparently governed by the occurrence of its putative parents, Agropyron trachycaulum (Link) Malte and Hordeum jubatum L. The hybrid E. macounii was produced by controlled cross-fertilization of A. trachycaulum and H. jubatum. Subsequently, octoploid E. macounii was obtained by colchicine treatment. Cytological studies indicated 2n = 28 for A. trachycaulum, H. jubatum, and E. macounii (both artificially produced and naturally occurring hybrids). Irregular meiosis of E. macounii and some irregularity in meiosis of octoploid E. macounii were observed.

scholarly journals Lack of pairing during meiosis triggers multigenerational transgene silencing in Caenorhabditis elegans

2015 ◽  
Vol 112 (20) ◽  
pp. E2667-E2676 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luciana E. Leopold ◽  
Bree N. Heestand ◽  
Soobin Seong ◽  
Ludmila Shtessel ◽  
Shawn Ahmed
Keyword(s):  
Caenorhabditis Elegans ◽  
Small Rna ◽  
Transgene Expression ◽  
Single Copy ◽  
Transgene Silencing ◽  
Meiotic Pairing ◽  
Homologous Chromosomes ◽  
Diverse Species ◽  
Secondary Sirna ◽  
Interfering Rna

Single-copy transgenes in Caenorhabditis elegans can be subjected to a potent, irreversible silencing process termed small RNA-induced epigenetic silencing (RNAe). RNAe is promoted by the Piwi Argonaute protein PRG-1 and associated Piwi-interacting RNAs (piRNAs), as well as by proteins that promote and respond to secondary small interfering RNA (siRNA) production. Here we define a related siRNA-mediated silencing process, termed “multigenerational RNAe,” which can occur for transgenes that are maintained in a hemizygous state for several generations. We found that transgenes that contain either GFP or mCherry epitope tags can be silenced via multigenerational RNAe, whereas a transgene that possesses GFP and a perfect piRNA target site can be rapidly and permanently silenced via RNAe. Although previous studies have shown that PRG-1 is typically dispensable for maintenance of RNAe, we found that both initiation and maintenance of multigenerational RNAe requires PRG-1 and the secondary siRNA biogenesis protein RDE-2. Although silencing via RNAe is irreversible, we found that transgene expression can be restored when hemizygous transgenes that were silenced via multigenerational RNAe become homozygous. Furthermore, multigenerational RNAe was accelerated when meiotic pairing of the chromosome possessing the transgene was abolished. We propose that persistent lack of pairing during meiosis elicits a reversible multigenerational silencing response, which can lead to permanent transgene silencing. Multigenerational RNAe may be broadly relevant to single-copy transgenes used in experimental biology and to shaping the epigenomic landscape of diverse species, where genomic polymorphisms between homologous chromosomes commonly result in unpaired DNA during meiosis.

scholarly journals Shugoshin Promotes Sister Kinetochore Biorientation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

2008 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 1199-1209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brendan M. Kiburz ◽  
Angelika Amon ◽  
Adele L. Marston
Keyword(s):  
Saccharomyces Cerevisiae ◽  
Chromosome Segregation ◽  
Minor Role ◽  
Meiotic Cell ◽  
Homologous Chromosomes ◽  
Cell Divisions ◽  
Sister Chromatids ◽  
Sister Kinetochore ◽  
A Minor ◽  
Meiosis I

Chromosome segregation must be executed accurately during both mitotic and meiotic cell divisions. Sgo1 plays a key role in ensuring faithful chromosome segregation in at least two ways. During meiosis this protein regulates the removal of cohesins, the proteins that hold sister chromatids together, from chromosomes. During mitosis, Sgo1 is required for sensing the absence of tension caused by sister kinetochores not being attached to microtubules emanating from opposite poles. Here we describe a differential requirement for Sgo1 in the segregation of homologous chromosomes and sister chromatids. Sgo1 plays only a minor role in segregating homologous chromosomes at meiosis I. In contrast, Sgo1 is important to bias sister kinetochores toward biorientation. We suggest that Sgo1 acts at sister kinetochores to promote their biorientation.

POLARIZATION AND PROGRESSION IN PAIRING: II. PREMEIOTIC ORIENTATION AND THE INITIATION OF PAIRING

1942 ◽  
Vol 20d (8) ◽  
pp. 221-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stanley G. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Homologous Chromosomes ◽  
Sister Chromatids ◽  
Somatic Pairing ◽  
The One

Homologous chromosomes in the Diptera associate side by side in pairs at each and every anaphase (somatic pairing) and reappear in the following prophases relationally coiled. In plants and animals other than Diptera the homologues at anaphase (with one exception) show no such specific attraction: at prophase the relational coiling of homologues is here supplanted by a relational coiling of sister chromatids. The one exception arises at the anaphase of the last premeiotic division—homologues become associated in pairs and reappear in the following prophase relationally coiled.In the Diptera the chromosomes are single at each and every anaphase: in other animals and plants the chromosomes are double at all anaphases except that of the last premeiotic division. Hence at this latter division the attraction in pairs between chromatids is replaced by an attraction between pairs of homologues.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document