Origin of amphibian and avian chromosomes by fission, fusion, and retention of ancestral chromosomes

Genome Research

Volumn 21, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 1306-1312

  Voss, Stephen R ^a   Kump, D Kevin ^a   Putta, Srikrishna ^a   Pauly, Nathan ^a   Reynolds, Anna ^a   Henry, Rema J ^a   Basa, Saritha ^a   Walker, John A ^a   Smith, Jeramiah J ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

^b BENAROYA RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMBYSTOMA MEXICANUM; AMPHIBIA; ANIMAL GENETICS; ARTICLE; CHICKEN; CHROMOSOME; CHROMOSOME NUMBER; CHROMOSOME REARRANGEMENT; CHROMOSOME SIZE; CHROMOSOME STRUCTURE; FOWL; GENE MAPPING; GENE ORDER; GENETIC CONSERVATION; GENETIC LINKAGE; GENETIC MODEL; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENOME ANALYSIS; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; NONHUMAN; ORTHOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SALAMANDER; SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT; SYNTENY; VERTEBRATE; XENOPUS; XENOPUS TROPICALIS;

AMBYSTOMA; AMPHIBIANS; ANIMALS; BIRDS; CHICKENS; CHROMOSOME MAPPING; CHROMOSOMES; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; GENETIC LINKAGE; HUMANS; XENOPUS;

AMBYSTOMA; AMBYSTOMA MEXICANUM; AMPHIBIA; ANURA; AVES; SALAMANDROIDEA; TETRAPODA; VERTEBRATA; XENOPUS TROPICALIS;

EID: 80051566443     PISSN: 10889051     EISSN: 15495469     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1101/gr.116491.110     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Bellott DW, Skaletsky H, Pyntikova T, Mardis ER, Graves T, Kremitzki C, Brown LG, Rozen S, Warren WC, Wilson RK, et al. 2010. Convergent evolution of chicken Z and human X chromosomes by expansion and gene acquisition. Nature 466: 612-616.
2. Bogart JP, Balon EK, Bruton MN. 1994. The chromosomes of the living coelacanth and their remarkable similarity to those of one of the most ancient frogs. J Hered 85: 322-325. (Pubitemid 24278099)
3. Burt DW. 2002. Origin of avian microchromosomes. Cytogenet Genome Res 96: 97-112.
4. Dalloul RA, Long JA, Zimin AV, Aslam L, Beal K, Ann Blomberg L, Bouffard P, Burt DW, Crasta O, Crooijmans RP, et al. 2010. Multi-platform next-generation sequencing of the domestic turkey (Meleagris gallopavo): genome assembly and analysis. PLoS Biol 8: 9. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000475.
5. Derjusheva S, Kurganova A, Habermann F, Gaginskaya E. 2004. High chromosome conservation detected by comparative chromosome painting in chicken, pigeon and passerine birds. Chromosome Res 12: 715-723. (Pubitemid 41217415)
6. Duellman WE, Trueb L. 1986. Biology of amphibians. McGraw-Hill, San Francisco, CA.
7. Green DM, Sessions SK, ed. 1991. Amphibian cytogenetics and evolution. Academic, San Diego, CA.
8. Griffin DK, Robertson LB, Tempest HG, Skinner BM. 2007. The evolution of the avian genome as revealed by comparative molecular cytogenetics. Cytogenet Genome Res 117: 64-77. (Pubitemid 47202666)
9. Guttenbach M, Nanda I, Feichtinger W, Masabanda JS, Griffin DK, Schmid M 2003. Comparative chromosome painting of chicken autosomal paints 1-9 in nine different bird species. Cytogenet Genome Res 103: 173-184. (Pubitemid 38401072)
10. Hansmann T, Nanda I, Volobouev V, Yang F, Schartl M, Haaf T, Schmid M. 2009. Cross-species chromosome painting corroborates microchromosome fusion during karyotype evolution of birds. Cytogenet Genome Res 126: 281-304.
11. Haussler D, O'Brien SJ, Ryder OA, Barker FK, Clamp M, Crawford A, Hanner R, Hanotte O, Johnson WE, McGuire JA, et al. 2009. Genome 10K: a proposal to obtain whole-genome sequence for 10,000 vertebrate species. J Hered 100: 659-674.
12. Hedges SB, Kumar S. 2004. Precision of molecular time estimates. Trends Genet 20: 242-247. (Pubitemid 38510437)
13. Hellsten U, Harland RM, Gilchrist MJ, Hendrix D, Jurka J, Kapitonov V, Ovcharenko I, Putnam NH, Shu S, Taher L, et al. 2010. The genome of the Western clawed frog Xenopus tropicalis. Science 328: 633-636.
14. Hughes AL, Friedman R. 2008. Genome size reduction in the chicken involved massive loss of ancestral protein coding genes. Mol Biol Evol 25: 2681-2688.
15. Itoh Y, Arnold AP. 2005. Chromosomal polymorphism and comparative painting analysis in the zebra finch. Chromosome Res 13: 47-56. (Pubitemid 40655461)
16. Kawai A, Nishida-Umehara C, Ishijima J, Tsuda Y, Ota H, Matsuda Y. 2007. Different origins of bird and reptile sex chromosomes inferred from comparative mapping of chicken Z-linked genes. Cytogenet Genome Res 117: 92-102. (Pubitemid 47202669)
17. Kayang BB, Fillon V, Inoue-Murayama M, Miwa M, Leroux S, Fève K, Monvoisin JL, Pitel F, Vignoles M, Mouilhayrat C, et al. 2006. Integrated maps in quail (Coturnix japonica) confirm the high degree of synteny conservation with chicken (Gallus gallus) despite 35 million years of divergence. BMC Genomics 7: 101. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-7-101.
18. Korol A, Ronin Y, Minkov D, Brivin E, Mester D, Korostishevsky M, Malkin I, Frenkel Z, Orion O, Cohen L, et al. 2003. MultiPoint 2.2. http://www.multiqtl.com.
19. Kosambi D. 1944. The estimation of map distances from recombination values. Ann Eugen 12: 172-175.
20. Larkin DM, Pape G, Donthu R, Auvil L, Welge M, Lewin HA. 2009. Breakpoint regions and homologous synteny blocks in chromosomes have different evolutionary histories. Genome Res 19: 770-777.
21. Matsuda Y, Nishida-Umehara C, Tarui H, Kuroiwa A, Yamada K, Isobe T, Ando J, Fujiwara A, Hirao Y, Nishimura O, et al. 2005. Highly conserved linkage homology between birds and turtles: bird and turtle chromosomes are precise counterparts of each other. Chromosome Res 13: 601-615. (Pubitemid 41367116)
22. Morescalchi A. 1973. Amphibia. In Cytotaxonomy and vertebrate evolution (ed. AB Chiarelli, E Campanna), pp. 233-348. Academic, London, UK.
23. Nakatani Y, Takeda H, Kohara Y, Morishita S. 2007. Reconstruction of the vertebrate ancestral genome reveals dynamic genome reorganization in early vertebrates. Genome Res 17: 1254-1265. (Pubitemid 47360900)
24. Nanda I, Benisch P, Fetting D, Haaf T, Schmid M. 2011. Synteny conservation of chicken macrochromosomes 1-10 in different avian lineages revealed by cross-species chromosome painting. Cytogenet Genome Res 132: 165-181.
25. Nie W, O'Brien PC, Ng BL, Fu B, Volobouev V, Carter NP, Ferguson-Smith MA, Yang F. 2009. Avian comparative genomics: reciprocal chromosome painting between domestic chicken (Gallus gallus) and the stone curlew (Burhinus oedicnemus, Charadriiformes) - an atypical species with low diploid number. Chromosome Res 17: 99-113.
26. Nie H, Crooijmans RP, Lammers A, van Schothorst EM, Keijer J, Neerincx PB, Leunissen JA, Megens HJ, Groenen MA. 2010. Gene expression in chicken reveals correlation with structural genomic features and conserved patterns of transcription in the terrestrial vertebrates. PLoS ONE 5: e11990. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.001990.
27. Olmo E. 2008. Trends in the evolution of reptilian chromosomes. Integr Comp Biol 48: 486-493.
28. Postlethwait JH, Woods IG, Ngo-Hazelett P, Yan YL, Kelly PD, Chu F, Huang H, Hill-Force A, Talbot WS. 2000. Zebrafish comparative genomics and the origins of vertebrate chromosomes. Genome Res 10: 1890-1902. (Pubitemid 32049135)
29. Putnam NH, Butts T, Ferrier DE, Furlong RF, Hellsten U, Kawashima T, Robinson-Rechavi M, Shoguchi E, Terry A, Yu JK, et al. 2008. The amphioxus genome and the evolution of the chordate karyotype. Nature 453: 1064-1071. (Pubitemid 351888243)
30. Putta S, Smith JJ, Walker JA, Rondet M, Weisrock DW, Monaghan J, Samuels AK, Kump DK, King DC, Maness NJ, et al. 2004. From biomedicine to natural history research: EST resources for ambystomatid salamanders. BMC Genomics 5: 54. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-5-54.
31. Riesz RR, Muller J. 2004. Molecular timescales and the fossil record: a paleontological perspective. Trends Genet 20: 237-241. (Pubitemid 38510436)
32. Ruta M, Coates MI, Quicke DJ. 2003. Early tetrapod relationships revisited. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 78: 251-345. (Pubitemid 36687356)
33. Sessions SK. 2008. Evolutionary cytogenetics in salamanders. Chromosome Res 16: 183-201. (Pubitemid 351294781)
34. Shetty S, Griffin DK, Graves JA. 1999. Comparative painting reveals strong chromosome homology over 80 million years of bird evolution. Chromosome Res 7: 289-295. (Pubitemid 29353704)
35. Smith JJ, Voss SR. 2006. Gene order data from a model amphibian: New perspectives on vertebrate genome structure and evolution. BMC Genomics 7: 219. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-7-219.
36. Smith JJ, Voss SR. 2007. Chromosomal regions from bird and mammalian sex chromosomes were linked ancestrally. Genetics 177: 607-613.
37. Smith JJ, Putta S, Walker JA, Kump DC, Samuels AK, Monaghan JR, Weisrock DW, Staben C, Voss SR. 2005a. Sal-Site: Integrating new and existing ambystomatid research and information resources. BMC Genomics 6: 181.doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-6-181.
38. Smith JJ, Kump K, Walker JA, Parichy DM, Voss SR. 2005b. A genetic linkage map for tiger salamander and mexican axolotl (Ambystoma): Enabling gene mapping, comparative genomics, and PCR marker development in Ambystoma. Genetics 171: 1161-1171. (Pubitemid 43234848)
39. Stapley J, Birkhead TR, Burke T, Slate J. 2008. A linkage map of the zebra finch Taeniopygia guttata provides new insights into avian genome evolution. Genetics 179: 651-667.
40. Vinogradov AE. 1998. Genome size and GC-percent in vertebrates as determined by flow cytometry: the triangular relationship. Cytometry 31: 100-109. (Pubitemid 28092058)
41. Völker M, Backström N, Skinner BM, Langley EJ, Bunzey SK, Ellegren H, Griffin DK. 2010. Copy number variation, chromosome rearrangement, and their association with recombination during avian evolution. Genome Res 20: 503-511.
42. Voorips RE. 2002. MapChart 2.1. http://www.plant.wageningenur.nl/ products/mapping/MapChart.
43. Voss SR, Shaffer HB. 1997. Adaptive evolution via a major gene effect: paedomorphosis in the Mexican axolotl. Proc Natl Acad Sci 94: 14185-14189. (Pubitemid 28009731)
44. Voss SR, Smith JJ, Gardiner DM, Parichy DM. 2001. Conserved vertebrate chromosomal segments in the large salamander genome. Genetics 158: 735-746. (Pubitemid 32552312)
45. Zhang P, Wake DB. 2009. Higher-level salamander relationships and divergence dates inferred from complete mitochondrial genomes. Mol Phylogenet Evol 53: 492-508.