Chapter 2on the other, two types <strong>of</strong> translocations can be dist<strong>in</strong>guished: nonhomologous andhomoeologous translocations.Dur<strong>in</strong>g the past several years, a large number <strong>of</strong> polyploids have been <strong>in</strong>duced by us<strong>in</strong>ghybrids <strong>of</strong> species and cultivars <strong>of</strong> <strong>Lilium</strong> and the result<strong>in</strong>g neopolyploids were analysedthrough GISH (Barba-Gonzalez et al. 2004; Barba-Gonzalez et al. 2005b; Barba-Gonzalez etal. 2006b; Karlov et al. 1999; Khan et al. 2009a; Lim et al. 2000; Zhou et al. 2008b). For thesynthesis <strong>of</strong> polyploids, both somatic <strong>chromosome</strong> doubl<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> the F1 hybrids throughchemicals such as colchic<strong>in</strong>e or oryzal<strong>in</strong> as well as sexual polyploidization throughnumerically unreduced (2n) gametes were used. These neopolyploid progeny are ideallysuitable for cytological <strong>analysis</strong> us<strong>in</strong>g GISH technique for two important reasons. 1. The<strong>chromosome</strong>s <strong>of</strong> <strong>Lilium</strong> species are very large and suitable for cytological <strong>analysis</strong>. 2. Thegenomes <strong>of</strong> the parents used for produc<strong>in</strong>g hybrids and their neopolyploids are so welldifferentiated that structural rearrangements, if any, can be identified accurately throughGISH <strong>in</strong> meiotic as well as somatic cells. The ma<strong>in</strong> aim <strong>of</strong> the present study is to <strong>in</strong>vestigate,through GISH <strong>analysis</strong>, whether chromosomal rearrangements occur <strong>in</strong> the neopolyploids <strong>of</strong><strong>Lilium</strong>. Furthermore, the reasons why <strong>in</strong>tergenomic recomb<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>in</strong> hybrids might bemistaken for chromosomal rearrangements are discussed.Materials and methodsPlant materialsPlant material consisted <strong>of</strong> polyploids derived from the hybrids <strong>of</strong> four groups <strong>of</strong> diploid (2n= 2x = 24) cultivars, viz., Longiflorum (L), Asiatic (A), Oriental (O) and Trumpet (T).Because the cultivars are derived from cross<strong>in</strong>g some closely related <strong>Lilium</strong> species (McRae1998), the specific names <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual species are avoided and the letters <strong>in</strong> each case<strong>in</strong>dicate the genomes. The first three <strong>of</strong> these groups (L, A and O) have resulted from cross<strong>in</strong>g<strong>of</strong> closely related species with<strong>in</strong> each <strong>of</strong> the three taxonomic sections, viz., Leucolirion,S<strong>in</strong>omartagon and Archelirion respectively. The last one, the Trumpet group, also belongs tothe section Leucolirion, the same as Longiflorum, but forms a separate crossability groupwith<strong>in</strong> the section and possesses a clearly differentiated genome (Lim et al. 2008a). For the<strong>analysis</strong> <strong>of</strong> polyploids derived from somatic <strong>chromosome</strong> doubl<strong>in</strong>g, the progeny <strong>of</strong> a crossbetween an allotriploid ‘Triumphator’ (LLO) with an allotetraploid (LLTT) the latter suppliedby one <strong>of</strong> the Dutch lily companies (Worldbreed<strong>in</strong>g BV) were used. The triploid parent <strong>of</strong> thiscross was produced by backcross<strong>in</strong>g the allotetraploid, LLOO, hybrid with diploidLongiflorum (LL). Meiotically doubled polyploids were produced by backcross<strong>in</strong>gLongiflorum × Asiatic (LA) and Oriental × Asiatic (OA) F1 hybrids with Asiatic parents <strong>in</strong>which the F1 hybrids had contributed 2n gametes and the result<strong>in</strong>g progenies were triploids(Barba-Gonzalez et al. 2006a; Khan et al. 2009a). Part <strong>of</strong> the backcross progeny <strong>of</strong> meiotic18
Chromosome rearrangements <strong>in</strong> <strong>Lilium</strong> hybridspolyploids was supplied by the follow<strong>in</strong>g Dutch lily breed<strong>in</strong>g companies: De Jong Lelies BV,Royal Van Zanten BV, Testcentrum BV, Vletter and Den Haan BV and Worldbreed<strong>in</strong>g BV.Mitotic and meiotic <strong>chromosome</strong> preparationsFor mitotic <strong>chromosome</strong> preparation, young roots were treated with 0.7mM cyclohexamidefor 4-6 hours at 4°C then transferred to Carnoy’s Solution (Ethanol 3: Acetic acid 1) andstored at 4°C until use. Root tips were <strong>in</strong>cubated <strong>in</strong> enzyme mixture (1% cellulose RS, 1%Pectolyase Y23, <strong>in</strong> 2mM citrate buffer, pH 4.5) for 90 m<strong>in</strong>utes at 37°C. Mitotic metaphase<strong>chromosome</strong>s were spread accord<strong>in</strong>g to Ross et al. (1996). For meiotic <strong>chromosome</strong>preparation, young anthers with stages from prophase I to telophase II were collected andfixed <strong>in</strong> fresh Carnoy’s solution for 24 h at 4°C. Part <strong>of</strong> fixed anthers was squashed <strong>in</strong> a drop<strong>of</strong> 2 % acetocarm<strong>in</strong>e to determ<strong>in</strong>e appropriate meiotic stage. Anthers with proper meioticstages were <strong>in</strong>cubated <strong>in</strong> enzyme mixture conta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g 1% pectolyase Y23, 1% cellulase RS and1% cytohelicase <strong>in</strong> 10mM citrate buffer (pH 4.5) at 37 °C for about 25 – 35 m<strong>in</strong>utes.Subsequently, the procedure used for meiotic <strong>chromosome</strong> preparations was the same as usedfor mitotic <strong>chromosome</strong>s.GISH procedureIn case <strong>of</strong> LLO × LLTT population, total genomic DNA was extracted from young leaves <strong>of</strong>Oriental cultivar ‘Sorbonne’ and Trumpet cultivar ‘Royal Gold’ with CTAB method. TheDNA was sonicated to 1-10kb fragments and used as probe. The DNA <strong>of</strong> Longiflorumcultivar ‘White Fox’ was autoclaved to 200-600bp fragments and used as block. For LA × AAand AA × OA hybrids and <strong>in</strong>terspecific F1 genotypes, sonicated DNA from Longiflorumcultivar ‘White Fox’ and Oriental cultivar ‘Sorbonne’ was used as probe respectively, whileautoclaved DNA from Asiatic cultivar ‘Connecticut K<strong>in</strong>g’ was used as block. Probe DNAwas labelled with either Digoxigen<strong>in</strong>-11-dUTP or Biot<strong>in</strong>-16-dUTP by standard Nicktranslation accord<strong>in</strong>g to the manufacturer’s <strong>in</strong>struction (Roche, Germany). The GISHprocedure was carried out as described previously (Khan et al. 2009a; Lim 2000). Briefly, thehybridization mixture conta<strong>in</strong>ed 50% formamide, 10% dextransulphate, 2×SSC, 0.25% SDS,0.6-1.0 ng/μl for each probe and 15-50 ng/μl block DNA. After hybridization and str<strong>in</strong>gencywash<strong>in</strong>g, the probes labelled with Digoxigen<strong>in</strong>-11-UTP and Biot<strong>in</strong>-16-UTP were detected byanti-digoxigen<strong>in</strong> and Cy3-streptavid<strong>in</strong> systems respectively. Then the slides werecountersta<strong>in</strong>ed with 1 μg/ml DAPI and mounted with Vectashield. Preparation were analysedus<strong>in</strong>g a Zeiss Axiophot epifluorescence microscope and photographed with a Canon digitalcamera.Chromosome identification and karyotyp<strong>in</strong>gImages <strong>of</strong> mitotic metaphase <strong>chromosome</strong>s were measured us<strong>in</strong>g the computer programMicroMeasure (Reeves and Tear 2000). In each <strong>of</strong> the four genomes (L, A, O, T), the19
- Page 3 and 4: A molecular cytogenetic analysis of
- Page 5: Table of ContentsChapter 1General I
- Page 8 and 9: Chapter 1LilyLilies belong to genus
- Page 10 and 11: Chapter 1counterparts (Finnegan 200
- Page 12 and 13: Chapter 1renewed interest in detect
- Page 14 and 15: Chapter 1recombination, mechanisms
- Page 16 and 17: Chapter 1is only an equational segr
- Page 18 and 19: Chapter 1quite divergent with vario
- Page 21 and 22: Chapter 2An assessment of chromosom
- Page 23: Chromosome rearrangements in Lilium
- Page 27 and 28: Chromosome rearrangements in Lilium
- Page 29 and 30: Chromosome rearrangements in Lilium
- Page 31 and 32: Chromosome rearrangements in Lilium
- Page 33 and 34: Chromosome rearrangements in Lilium
- Page 35 and 36: Chromosome rearrangements in Lilium
- Page 37 and 38: Chapter 3Elucidation of intergenomi
- Page 39 and 40: Intergenomic recombination and chro
- Page 41 and 42: Intergenomic recombination and chro
- Page 43 and 44: Intergenomic recombination and chro
- Page 45 and 46: Intergenomic recombination and chro
- Page 47 and 48: Intergenomic recombination and chro
- Page 49: Intergenomic recombination and chro
- Page 52 and 53: Chapter 4AbstractMeiotic abnormalit
- Page 54 and 55: Chapter 4There are some criteria to
- Page 56 and 57: Chapter 4FISH experiments were perf
- Page 58 and 59: Chapter 4was apparently shorter, wi
- Page 60 and 61: Chapter 4bridges is explained as U-
- Page 62 and 63: Chapter 4of the sexual polyploidize
- Page 64 and 65: Chapter 4fragment have the same len
- Page 66 and 67: Chapter 5AbstractSupernumerary (B)
- Page 68 and 69: Chapter 5their origin, the structur
- Page 70 and 71: Chapter 5Fig. 5.1. Discovery of B c
- Page 72 and 73: Chapter 5In order to investigate th
- Page 74 and 75:
Chapter 5Centric breakage and fusio
- Page 76 and 77:
Chapter 5It has not, however, been
- Page 78 and 79:
Chapter 6The results presented in t
- Page 80 and 81:
Chapter 6model for molecular cytoge
- Page 82 and 83:
Chapter 6Fig. 6.2. The meiosis proc
- Page 84 and 85:
Chapter 6over events during FDR mei
- Page 86 and 87:
Chapter 6been detected with GISH an
- Page 88 and 89:
Chapter 6Another feature caused by
- Page 91 and 92:
ReferencesAbe, H.A., Nakano, M.N.,
- Page 93 and 94:
ReferencesChen, Q., and Armstrong,
- Page 95 and 96:
ReferencesHartlerode, A.J., and Scu
- Page 97 and 98:
ReferencesLarson, S.R., Kishii, M.,
- Page 99 and 100:
ReferencesMcClintock, B. 1931. Cyto
- Page 101 and 102:
ReferencesRai, R., Zheng, H., He, H
- Page 103 and 104:
ReferencesStewart, R.N. 1947. The m
- Page 105:
ReferencesZhang, L., Pickering, R.,
- Page 108 and 109:
Summarychromosome rearrangements. T
- Page 111 and 112:
SamenvattingLelie (Lilium) is in de
- Page 113 and 114:
Samenvattingaantal 35 met daarnaast
- Page 115 and 116:
摘 要百 合 系 百 合 科 百
- Page 117 and 118:
Acknowledgements淡 看 世 事 去
- Page 119:
Curriculum VitaeSonglin Xie was bor
- Page 123:
Education Statement of the Graduate