Preparation of Xenopus tropicalis whole chromosome painting probes using laser microdissection and reconstruction of X. laevis tetraploid karyotype by Zoo-FISH

2010 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 431-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vladimir Krylov ◽  
Svatava Kubickova ◽  
Jiri Rubes ◽  
Jaroslav Macha ◽  
Tereza Tlapakova ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 160 (4) ◽  
pp. 199-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tiago M. Degrandi ◽  
Suziane A. Barcellos ◽  
Alice L. Costa ◽  
Analía D.V. Garnero ◽  
Iris Hass ◽  
...  

Bird chromosomes, which have been investigated scientifically for more than a century, present a number of unique features. In general, bird karyotypes have a high diploid number (2n) of typically around 80 chromosomes that are divided into macro- and microchromosomes. In recent decades, FISH studies using whole chromosome painting probes have shown that the macrochromosomes evolved through both inter- and intrachromosomal rearrangements. However, chromosome painting data are available for only a few bird species, which hinders a more systematic approach to the understanding of the evolutionary history of the enigmatic bird karyotype. Thus, we decided to create an innovative database through compilation of the cytogenetic data available for birds, including chromosome numbers and the results of chromosome painting with chicken (Gallus gallus) probes. The data were obtained through an extensive literature review, which focused on cytogenetic studies published up to 2019. In the first version of the “Bird Chromosome Database (BCD)” (https://sites.unipampa.edu.br/birdchromosomedatabase) we have compiled data on the chromosome numbers of 1,067 bird species and chromosome painting data on 96 species. We found considerable variation in the diploid numbers, which ranged from 40 to 142, although most (around 50%) of the species studied up to now have between 78 and 82 chromosomes. Despite its importance for cytogenetic research, chromosome painting has been applied to less than 1% of all bird species. The BCD will enable researchers to identify the main knowledge gaps in bird cytogenetics, including the most under-sampled groups, and make inferences on chromosomal homologies in phylogenetic studies.


Hereditas ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 128 (3) ◽  
pp. 257-263 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Schmitz ◽  
A. Oustry ◽  
D. Vaiman ◽  
B. Chaput ◽  
G. Frelat ◽  
...  

2005 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 27-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence C. Dugan ◽  
Melissa S. Pattee ◽  
Jennifer Williams ◽  
Mike y ◽  
Karen Sorensen ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalya A. Lemskaya ◽  
Svetlana A. Romanenko ◽  
Yulia V. Maksimova ◽  
Asia R. Shorina ◽  
Dmitry V. Yudkin

Abstract Background The presence of small supernumerary marker chromosomes (sSMCs) in a karyotype leads to diagnostic questions because the resulting extra material may cause abnormal development depending on the origin of the duplication/triplication. Because SMCs are so small, their origin cannot be determined by conventional cytogenetic techniques, and new molecular cytogenetic methods are necessary. Here, we applied a target approach to chromosome rearrangement analysis by isolating a chromosome of interest via microdissection and using it in fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) as a probe in combination with whole-chromosome painting probes. This approach allows to identify origins of both the euchromatin and repeat-rich regions of a marker. Case presentation We report a case of an adult male with congenital atresia of the rectum and anus, anotia, and atresia of the external auditory canal along with hearing loss. Karyotyping and FISH analysis with whole-chromosome painting probes of acrocentric chromosomes and the constructed microdissection library of the marker chromosome reliably identified an additional chromosome in some metaphases: mos 47,XY,+idic(22)(q11.2)[14]/46,XY [23]. Conclusion We propose to use whole-chromosome libraries and microdissected chromosomes in FISH to identify SMCs enriched with repeated sequences. We show that the methodology is successful in identifying the composition of a satellited marker chromosome.


2015 ◽  
Vol 111 ◽  
pp. 40-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maciej Wnuk ◽  
Beata Miedziak ◽  
Klaudia Kulak ◽  
Anita Panek ◽  
Ewelina Golec ◽  
...  

2004 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 337-343 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Thalhammer ◽  
Sabine Langer ◽  
Michael R. Speicher ◽  
Wolfgang M. Heckl ◽  
Jochen B. Geigl

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document