Literature DB >> 15088654

Mitotic and polytene chromosomes: comparisons between Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila simulans.

Sylvie Aulard1, Laurence Monti, Nicole Chaminade, Françoise Lemeunier.   

Abstract

This review deals with the differences between Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila simulans in their mitotic and polytene chromosomes. The description of the mitotic karyotypes of D. melanogaster and D. simulans is mainly based on the methods that allow to differentiate their euchromatin from their heterochromatin: banding patterns, distribution of satellite DNAs and location of the rDNA. The polytene chromosomes karyotypes are known for many years to differ by a major paracentric inversion on chromosome 3 and minor few differences. The main difference take place in their chromosomal polymorphism: D. melanogaster is highly polymorphic while D. simulans has long been known to be a monomorphic species. In fact, despite worldwide studies of natural populations for both species, only 14 unique inversions have been described for D. simulans while more than 500 inversions are already known for D. melanogaster.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15088654     DOI: 10.1023/b:gene.0000017637.10230.c4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genetica        ISSN: 0016-6707            Impact factor:   1.082


  14 in total

1.  Allelic imbalance in Drosophila hybrid heads: exons, isoforms, and evolution.

Authors:  R M Graze; L L Novelo; V Amin; J M Fear; G Casella; S V Nuzhdin; L M McIntyre
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2012-01-07       Impact factor: 16.240

2.  Unusual pattern of nucleotide sequence variation at the OS-E and OS-F genomic regions of Drosophila simulans.

Authors:  Alejandro Sánchez-Gracia; Julio Rozas
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2007-02-04       Impact factor: 4.562

3.  Revisiting the Impact of Inversions in Evolution: From Population Genetic Markers to Drivers of Adaptive Shifts and Speciation?

Authors:  Ary A Hoffmann; Loren H Rieseberg
Journal:  Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst       Date:  2008-12-01       Impact factor: 13.915

4.  Sequence-based detection and breakpoint assembly of polymorphic inversions.

Authors:  Russell B Corbett-Detig; Charis Cardeno; Charles H Langley
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2012-06-05       Impact factor: 4.562

5.  Cytogenetic analysis of Anopheles ovengensis revealed high structural divergence of chromosomes in the Anopheles nili group.

Authors:  Maria V Sharakhova; Ashley Peery; Christophe Antonio-Nkondjio; Ai Xia; Cyrille Ndo; Parfait Awono-Ambene; Frederic Simard; Igor V Sharakhov
Journal:  Infect Genet Evol       Date:  2013-03-19       Impact factor: 3.342

6.  Genome-wide patterns of natural variation reveal strong selective sweeps and ongoing genomic conflict in Drosophila mauritiana.

Authors:  Viola Nolte; Ram Vinay Pandey; Robert Kofler; Christian Schlötterer
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2012-10-10       Impact factor: 9.043

7.  The selection and use of sorghum (Sorghum propinquum) bacterial artificial chromosomes as cytogenetic FISH probes for maize (Zea mays L.).

Authors:  Debbie M Figueroa; James D Davis; Cornelia Strobel; Maria S Conejo; Katherine D Beckham; Brian C Ring; Hank W Bass
Journal:  J Biomed Biotechnol       Date:  2010-12-22

8.  Drosophila duplication hotspots are associated with late-replicating regions of the genome.

Authors:  Margarida Cardoso-Moreira; J J Emerson; Andrew G Clark; Manyuan Long
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2011-11-03       Impact factor: 5.917

9.  Population genomics of inversion polymorphisms in Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  Russell B Corbett-Detig; Daniel L Hartl
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2012-12-20       Impact factor: 5.917

10.  Genome assembly and annotation of a Drosophila simulans strain from Madagascar.

Authors:  Nicola Palmieri; Viola Nolte; Jun Chen; Christian Schlötterer
Journal:  Mol Ecol Resour       Date:  2014-07-14       Impact factor: 7.090

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.