13.07.2015 Views

A molecular cytogenetic analysis of chromosome behavior in Lilium ...

A molecular cytogenetic analysis of chromosome behavior in Lilium ...

A molecular cytogenetic analysis of chromosome behavior in Lilium ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

General DiscussionTwo translocated <strong>chromosome</strong>s usually form ‘pseudol<strong>in</strong>kage’ (Albrecht and Chetelat 2009;Farré et al. 2010; Kamphuis et al. 2007). Meanwhile, s<strong>in</strong>ce normal and translocated segmentslead to reduced crossover <strong>in</strong>terference, distance between markers on normal and translocated<strong>chromosome</strong> fragments will be wrongly estimated, marker order is ambiguous along themerged l<strong>in</strong>kage groups and higher str<strong>in</strong>gencies (<strong>in</strong>crease the LODs) do not result <strong>in</strong> a division<strong>in</strong>to two balanced <strong>chromosome</strong>s (Albrecht and Chetelat 2009). Third, the existence <strong>of</strong>duplication leads to erroneous location <strong>of</strong> markers <strong>in</strong> the l<strong>in</strong>kage group associated with the<strong>chromosome</strong> with duplication (Fig. 6.1). Furthermore, <strong>chromosome</strong>s with two or more types<strong>of</strong> structure variation make the genetic maps even more complicated. In conclusion,<strong>chromosome</strong> rearrangements not only cause reduced fertility, but also lead to errors whenestimat<strong>in</strong>g genetic distances between markers.Sexual polyploidization and its significance <strong>in</strong> polyploidy mapp<strong>in</strong>gWhen <strong>in</strong>terspecific crosses are made between distantly related species, the result<strong>in</strong>g hybridsare generally sterile. This hybrid sterility is expla<strong>in</strong>ed to be due to the failure <strong>of</strong> <strong>chromosome</strong>association and the forthcom<strong>in</strong>g error-disjo<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g dur<strong>in</strong>g meiosis because <strong>of</strong> the parentaldivergence (Asano 1982). However, there is still a wide genetic variation, with some<strong>in</strong>dividuals possess<strong>in</strong>g a low fertility. These outstand<strong>in</strong>g genotypes normally produceunreduced (2n) gametes, as well as fewer n gametes (Ramanna and Jacobsen 2003). Theprocess <strong>of</strong> restor<strong>in</strong>g fertility through unreduced gametes is termed as sexual (meiotic)polyploidization, as a comparison with asexual (mitotic) polyploidization. The production <strong>of</strong>unreduced gametes has been reported <strong>in</strong> many <strong>in</strong>terspecific hybrids, such as <strong>Lilium</strong> (Van Tuylet al. 1989), Alstroemeria (Kamstra et al. 1999), Allium (Khrustaleva and Kik 1998) andothers. One <strong>of</strong> the ma<strong>in</strong> advantages <strong>of</strong> sexual polyploidization, compared with its counterpart,is the occurrence <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>tergenomic recomb<strong>in</strong>ation dur<strong>in</strong>g the production <strong>of</strong> unreduced gametes,which will lead to segregation and diversity <strong>in</strong> the next generation (Ramanna and Jacobsen2003). The segregation <strong>in</strong> the result<strong>in</strong>g population provides a possibility for genetic mapp<strong>in</strong>g.When detect<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>tergenomic alteration <strong>in</strong> sexual polyploidized allopolyploids, <strong>molecular</strong><strong>cytogenetic</strong> techniques (GISH and FISH) are more powerful compared with <strong>molecular</strong>markers. The detect<strong>in</strong>g efficiency <strong>of</strong> the two methods with respect to unreduced (2n) gametesis compared <strong>in</strong> Fig. 6.3. GISH can simultaneously detect <strong>in</strong>tergenomic recomb<strong>in</strong>ation,characterize the cross<strong>in</strong>g over events and trace the orig<strong>in</strong> <strong>of</strong> non-sister chromatid exchangeswhen comb<strong>in</strong>ed with meiosis observation. However, <strong>molecular</strong> markers with multi-locus<strong>analysis</strong> <strong>in</strong> cross<strong>in</strong>g progenies cannot detect reciprocal cross<strong>in</strong>g over, and quantification <strong>of</strong>allele number by the <strong>in</strong>tensity <strong>of</strong> bands is not always accurate (Gaeta and Pires 2010; Nicolaset al. 2007). For example, <strong>in</strong> four types <strong>of</strong> segregated products between homoeologous<strong>chromosome</strong>s with a s<strong>in</strong>gle or two strand double crossover dur<strong>in</strong>g FDR meiosis (Fig. 6.3),GISH can detect all the <strong>in</strong>tergenomic recomb<strong>in</strong>ations, whereas <strong>molecular</strong> markers can onlydetect two types <strong>of</strong> them. In the recomb<strong>in</strong>ant <strong>chromosome</strong>s derived from different cross<strong>in</strong>g77

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!