| Literature DB >> 27134655 |
Anna I Solovyeva1, Vera N Stefanova1, Olga I Podgornaya2, Serghei Iu Demin1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Trematodes have a complex life cycle with animal host changes and alternation of parthenogenetic and hermaphrodite generations. The parthenogenetic generation of the worm (rediae) from the first intermediate host Littorina littorea was used for chromosome spreads production. Karyotype description of parasitic flatworm Himasthla elongata Mehlis, 1831 (Digenea: Himasthlidae) based on fluorochrome banding and 18S rDNA mapping.Entities:
Keywords: 18S rDNA mapping; Digenea; Himasthla elongata; Karyotype
Year: 2016 PMID: 27134655 PMCID: PMC4850635 DOI: 10.1186/s13039-016-0246-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mol Cytogenet ISSN: 1755-8166 Impact factor: 2.009
Fig. 1a, b flattened small pieces of tissues with large sized prometaphase-metaphase and interphase cells in association with small sized, probably senescent or stem cells (asterisk), dissociated mature rediae (Giemsa staining). c, d DIC images of alive juvenile cercaria (lateral fragment of the body) and its embryo; (c) – tegumental margin with large subtegumental glandular cells (white arrows) and small, probably senescent or stem cells (black arrows); (d) cercarial embryo, nucleoli are visible (arrowheads). Scale bar – 10 μm
Fig. 2a H.elongata DAPI-stained chromosome spreads in grey scale. b karyotype shown in a. Scale bar – 10 μm
Frequencies of chromosomes with dissociated sister chromatids in H. elongata chromosome spreads (N = 100)
| Number of chromosomes with dissociated SCs in each spread | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 23 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % of spreads with chromosomes with dissociated SCs | 1.0 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 11.0 | 7.0 | 13.0 | 6.0 | 9.0 | 8.0 | 9.0 | 10.0 | 3.0 | 4.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 |
The top row of the table indicates the number of chromosomes with dissociated sister chromatids (SCs) detected in each spread. The bottom row of the table indicates the percent of corresponding cells among 100 spreads analysed
Relative length (means ± SD) and centromeric index of H. elongata chromosomes
| Chromosome № | Relative length, % | Centromeric index, % | Classification |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 14.6 ± 1.7 | 37.2 ± 2.8 | m-sm |
| 2 | 12.6 ± 2.1 | 14.9 ± 2.3 | st |
| 3 | 10.8 ± 2.0 | 42.2 ± 3.8 | m |
| 4 | 9.4 ± 1.4 | 20.2 ± 3.1 | st |
| 5 | 8.4 ± 1.5 | 21.4 ± 2.9 | st |
| 6 | 8.3 ± 1.6 | 15.8 ± 2.6 | st |
| 7 | 8.2 ± 1.4 | 14.8 ± 2.8 | st |
| 8 | 7.0 ± 1.1 | 24.2 ± 3.4 | sm-st |
| 9 | 6.5 ± 1.0 | 24.5 ± 2.9 | sm-st |
| 10 | 5.6 ± 1.0 | 27.1 ± 3.6 | sm-st |
| 11 | 5.2 ± 0.9 | 20.2 ± 2.8 | st |
| 12 | 4.1 ± 1.9 | 20.7 ± 2.3 | st |
m metacentric, sm submetacentric, st subtelocentric (= acrocentric)
Fig. 3H. elongata chromosomes ideogram. Left chromatid on each ideogram represents the summary of chromosome bands with the best resolution and maximum amount of bands visible; the right chromatid represent chromatid often observed; p and q arms are marked. Differences between sizes of DAPI-bands are indicated by circles of two sizes, fluorescence intensity are marked by three shades in grey scale. The terminal bands (chromosomes 2–5, 9) which are designated as black line bordered circles, are not always detected after DAPI-staining. Heterochromatin containing bands are designated with hatching. The straight lines adjacent to the chromosome on both sides indicate the centromere position
Fig. 4Representative rows of individual DAPI-banded H. elongata chromosomes. Each row begins with the ideogram of chromosome ; p and q arms marked; Differences between sizes of DAPI-bands are indicated by circles of two sizes, fluorescence intensity are marked by three shades in grey scale. The following row shows the main chromosome structural variations. Chromosomes are arranged according to decrease of their length and bands’ resolution. The straight lines adjacent to the chromosome on both sides indicate the centromere position
Distribution of different types of homologous sister chromatid segregation in H. elongata chromosomes (100 spreads analysed)
| Chromosome № | Homologous chromosomes combinations | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Dissociated SCs | Dissociated and conjugated SCs | Conjugated SCs | |
| 1 | 15.0 | 45.0 | 40.0 |
| 2 | 17.0 | 47.0 | 36.0 |
| 3 | 13.0 | 30.0 | 57.0 |
| 4 | 59.0 | 26.0 | 15.0 |
| 5 | 53.0 | 30.0 | 17.0 |
| 6 | 45.0 | 32.0 | 33.0 |
| 7 | 16.0 | 35.0 | 49.0 |
| 8 | 56.0 | 33.0 | 11.0 |
| 9 | 66.0 | 21.0 | 12.0 |
| 10 | 74.0 | 20.0 | 6.0 |
| 11 | 58.0 | 23.0 | 19.0 |
| 12 | 10.0 | 17.0 | 73.0 |
Columns represent % of spreads with amount of homologs dissociated or conjugated for correspondent chromosomes
Fig. 5a H. elongata chromosomes stained by CMA3. b DAPI-stained chromosomes (c) merged image (d) karyotype derived from the cell shown in Fig. 6c. Arrows indicate polymorphic sites detected by double fluorochrome staining. Scale bar – 10 μm
Fig. 6rDNA clusters revealed by FISH with 18S rDNA probe (red signals); chromosomes were counterstained with DAPI (in grey scale). a 1 – interphase nuclei. 2, 3 – premitotic and mitotic plates with rDNA signals. 4 – karyotype derived from the cell shown in (2). Scale bar – 10 μm. b 18S rDNA clusters on chromosomes 3,6,10. Chromosomes from different spreads are combined with their ideograms (Fig. 3). Black arrow indicates the increase of detected rDNA signals frequency
Chromosome number described for Echinostomatidae Looss, 1899 family representatives before recent phylogenetic update [2]
| Species | Chromosome number (2n) | Reference |
|---|---|---|
|
| 14 | Barsiene, Kiseliene, 1990 [ |
|
| 20 | Staneviciute et al. 2015 [ |
|
| 20 | Mutafova, Kanev, 1984 [ |
|
| 20 | Mutafova et al. 1987 [ |
|
| 20 | Barsiene et al. 1990 [ |
|
| 22 | Mutafova, Kanev, 1983 [ |
|
| 22 | Richard, Voltz, 1987 [ |
|
| 22 | Mutafova, Kanev, 1983; 1986 [ |
|
| 22 | Mutafova, Kanev, 1983; 1986 [ |
|
| 22 | Terasaki et al. 1982 [ |
|
| 20 | Terasaki et al. 1982 [ |
|
| 20 | Barsiene, Kiseliene, 1990 [ |
|
| 20 | Mutafova et al. 1986 [ |
|
| 20 | Mutafova, et al. 1991 [ |
|
| 20 | Barsiene et al. 1990 [ |
|
| 20 | Mutafova, 1994 [ |
|
| 16 | Mutafova, 1994 [ |
|
| 20 | Aleksandrova, Podgornova, 1978 [ |
|
| 20 | Aleksandrova, Podgornova, 1978 [ |
|
| 22 | Mutafova et al. 2001 [ |