Next Article in Journal
Genetic Biomonitoring and Biodiversity Assessment Using Portable Sequencing Technologies: Current Uses and Future Directions
Next Article in Special Issue
Decoding the Role of Satellite DNA in Genome Architecture and Plasticity—An Evolutionary and Clinical Affair
Previous Article in Journal
Predominance of Dystrophinopathy Genotypes in Mexican Male Patients Presenting as Muscular Dystrophy with A Normal Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction DMD Gene Result: A Study Including Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing
Previous Article in Special Issue
Chromosomics: Bridging the Gap between Genomes and Chromosomes
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Genes
Volume 10
Issue 11
10.3390/genes10110857
genes-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Comparative Chromosome Mapping of Musk Ox and the X Chromosome among Some Bovidae Species

by
Anastasia A. Proskuryakova
1,*,
Anastasia I. Kulemzina
1,
Polina L. Perelman
1,2,
Dmitry V. Yudkin
3,
Natalya A. Lemskaya
1,3,
Innokentii M. Okhlopkov
4,
Egor V. Kirillin
4,
Marta Farré
5,6,
Denis M. Larkin
5,
Melody E. Roelke-Parker
7,
Stephen J. O’Brien
8,9,
Mitchell Bush
10 and
Alexander S. Graphodatsky
1,2
1
Institute of Molecular and Cellular Biology, SB RAS, 630090 Novosibirsk, Russia
2
Novosibirsk State University, 630090 Novosibirsk, Russia
3
State Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology “Vector”, Federal Service for Surveillance on Consumer Rights Protection and Human Well-being (FBRI SRC VB “Vector”, Rospotrebnadzor), 630559 Koltsovo, Novosibirsk Region, Russia
4
Institute for Biological Problems of Cryolithozone Siberian Branch of RAS, 677980 Yakutsk, Russia
5
The Royal Veterinary College, Royal College Street, University of London, London NW1 0TU, UK
6
School of Biosciences, University of Kent, Canterbury CT2 7NJ, UK
7
Frederick National Laboratory of Cancer Research, Leidos Biomedical Research, Inc., Frederick, MD 21701, USA
8
Theodosius Dobzhansky Center for Genome Bioinformatics, Saint-Petersburg State University, Sredniy Av. 41A, 199034 Saint-Petersburg, Russia
9
Oceanographic Center, Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale 3301 College Ave, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33314, USA
10
The Center for Species Survival, Department of Reproductive Sciences, Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, Smithsonian’s National Zoological Park, 1500 Remount Road, Front Royal, VA 22630, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Genes 2019, 10(11), 857; https://doi.org/10.3390/genes10110857
Submission received: 17 September 2019 / Revised: 16 October 2019 / Accepted: 24 October 2019 / Published: 29 October 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Mechanisms Driving Karyotype Evolution and Genomic Architecture)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Bovidae, the largest family in Pecora infraorder, are characterized by a striking variability in diploid number of chromosomes between species and among individuals within a species. The bovid X chromosome is also remarkably variable, with several morphological types in the family. Here we built a detailed chromosome map of musk ox (Ovibos moschatus), a relic species originating from Pleistocene megafauna, with dromedary and human probes using chromosome painting. We trace chromosomal rearrangements during Bovidae evolution by comparing species already studied by chromosome painting. The musk ox karyotype differs from the ancestral pecoran karyotype by six fusions, one fission, and three inversions. We discuss changes in pecoran ancestral karyotype in the light of new painting data. Variations in the X chromosome structure of four bovid species nilgai bull (Boselaphus tragocamelus), saola (Pseudoryx nghetinhensis), gaur (Bos gaurus), and Kirk’s Dikdik (Madoqua kirkii) were further analyzed using 26 cattle BAC-clones. We found the duplication on the X in saola. We show main rearrangements leading to the formation of four types of bovid X: Bovinae type with derived cattle subtype formed by centromere reposition and Antilopinae type with Caprini subtype formed by inversion in XSB1.

1. Introduction

Cetartiodactyla is a large mammalian order, including camels, whales, pigs, hippos, and ruminants—the suborder of animals with divided stomach. Bovidae is the most specious family in Ruminantia comprising 143 species with 50 genera [1]. Bovidae is generally subdivided into 2 subfamilies: Bovinae (the bovids: tribes Bovini, Tragelaphini and Boselaphini), represented by nilgai, four-horned antelope, wild cattle, bison, Asian buffalo, African buffalo, and kudu; and Antilopinae (antelopes and caprini: Neotragini, Aepycerotini, Cephalophini, Oreotragini, Hippotragini, Alcelaphini, Caprini, Antilopini, and Reduncini tribes), represented by antelopes, gazelles, goats and their relatives [2]. Bovids include several domesticated species (cattle, goat, and sheep) with high economic significance. Although recent advances have been made in the genomic inference of these species, phylogenetic relationships of species within the family are complex and remain somewhat unresolved [3].
Accumulated cytogenetic data for the Bovidae family allow tracing the trends in evolution of karyotypes of the Bovinae [4,5,6,7] and Antilopinae [7,8,9,10,11] subfamilies. Bovid karyotypes are characterized by tandem and Robertsonian translocations of acrocentric chromosomes, producing wide variation in (2n) chromosome numbers [12,13]. Previously, some 43 bovid species have been studied by comparative chromosome painting, mostly with cattle painting probes [14]. Due to its economic importance, the cattle genome has been widely studied, identifying interchromosome rearrangements between species but resolving few intrachromosomal rearrangements. The use of high-resolution dromedary probes [5] and BAC mapping [9,15] has provided increased precision with respect to syntenic segments orientation relative to centromeres and inversions. Proposed ancestral Bovidae and pecoran karyotypes were imputed based on genomic [16] and cytogenetic data [5,16,17]. Although the diploid chromosome number of Bovidae species ranges from 30 to 60, the number of autosomal arms in karyotypes is stable at 58 for most karyotyped species [18]. Comparative chromosome painting data have been applied to phylogenetic analyses of relationships between tribes. For example, a clear marker association was detected for Tragelaphini: the translocation of cattle chromosomes 1;29 [8], which is shared by all members of this group. Because large chromosomal rearrangements by and large correspond in a parsimony sense to morphology-based phylogenies for the group, it seems that chromosomal rearrangements played an important role in the speciation of the Bovidae family [12].
The X chromosome in the Bovidae family presents a special case in Bovidae evolution. displaying marked karyotypic variability between species, in contrast to highly conserved X chromosome morphology seen for the majority of eutherian mammals [19]. Surprisingly, unlike conserved X chromosome of the majority of eutherian mammals noted by Ohno [19], bovid chromosome X displayed variability. Several types of the X chromosome were identified: the cattle type appeared to be submetacentric, while the tragelaphines and antilopinae was acrocentric [20].
Cytogenetic maps of Bos taurus, Bubalus bubalis, and Ovis aries X chromosomes, when compared with that of Homo sapiens, revealed the conservation of pseudoautosomal region position in the Antilopinae subfamily, which was detected using a molecular cytogenetics approach [21,22]. In Ruminants and, especially, in the Bovidae family, a substantial number of intrachromosomal rearrangements, including inversions and centromere repositions, have been identified previously by using comparative bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) mapping [15]. The cited research, however, described species from only three tribes: Bovini, Hippotragini, and Caprini. Moreover, several independent bovid lineages show the presence of compound sex chromosomes resulting from gonosome and autosome fusions [8,14,20,21,23]. Here, we extend the list of 18 species studied by detailed X chromosome BAC mapping to include species from three tribes: nilgai bull (Boselaphini), saola, gaur (Bovini), and Kirk’s Dikdik (Antilopini) to reveal intrachromosomal rearrangements that occurred on the X chromosome in Bovidae family.
Among species of Bovidae family, musk ox (Ovibos moschatus), deserves special attention. This species belongs to a basal branch of the Caprini tribe [3], and along with reindeer, they are the only ungulates of the Arctic to survive the late Pleistocene extinction associated the most recent retreat from glaciation [24]. There are classic cytogenetic [25,26,27] and molecular cytogenetic data on chromosome fusions [14] in musk ox karyotype. Moreover, there is a huge pool of data describing cetariodactyl karyotypes using chromosome painting [14,28], especially using human and dromedary probes [5,29,30]. Here, we used the combination of these human and dromedary painting probes to establish a detailed comparative chromosome map for musk ox to interpret the descent of this species’ genome organization in an evolutionary context.

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Species

The list of studied species, diploid chromosome number, and the source of cell lines are presented in Table 1. All cell lines belong to the cell culture collection of general biological purpose (No. 0310-2016-0002) of the Institute of Molecular and Cellular Biology (IMCB) of the Siberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences (SB RAS).

2.2. Chromosome Preparation

Metaphase chromosomes were obtained from fibroblast cell lines. Briefly, cells were incubated at 37 °C in 5% CO2 in medium αMEM (Gibco), supplemented with 15% fetal bovine serum (Gibco), 5% AmnioMAX-II complete (Gibco) and antibiotics (ampicillin 100 μg/mL, penicillin 100 μg/mL, amphotericin B 2.5 μg/mL). Metaphases were obtained by adding colcemid (0.02 mg/L) and ethidium bromide (1.5 mg/mL) to actively dividing culture for 3–4 hours. Hypotonic treatment was performed with 3 mM KCl, 0.7 mM sodium citrate for 20 min at 37 °C and followed by fixation with 3:1 methanol:glacial acetic acid (Carnoy’s) fixative. Metaphase chromosome preparations were made from a suspension of fixed fibroblasts, as described previously [31,32]. G-banding on metaphase chromosomes prior to fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was performed using the standard procedure [33]. Heterochromatin analysis was performed by the Combined Method of Heterogeneous Heterochromatin Detection (CDAG) [34]. AT- and GC-enriched repetitive sequences were detected by DAPI (40-6-diamidino-2-phenylindol) and CMA3 (chromomycin A3) fluorescent dyes following formamide denaturation and renaturation in hot salt solution.

2.3. FISH Probes

The protocol for the selection of BAC-clones was reported previously [15]. Briefly, we selected 26 BAC clones highly conserved among Cetartiodactyla from bovine CHORI-240 library using bioinformatic tools. BAC DNA was isolated using the Plasmid DNA Isolation Kit (BioSilica, Novosibirsk, Russia) and amplified with GenomePlex Whole Genome Amplification kit (Sigma-Aldrich Co., St. Louis, MO, USA). Labeling of BAC DNA was performed using GenomePlex WGA Reamplification Kit (Sigma-Aldrich Co., St. Louis, MO, USA) by incorporating biotin-16-dUTP or digoxigenin-dUTP (Roche, Basel, Switzerland). The list of BAC-clones is shown in Table 2. Plasmid containing ribosomal DNA [35] was amplified and labeled as described above. Telomere repeats were synthesized and labeled in non-template PCR using primers (TTAGGG)5 and (CCCTAA)5 [36]. Human and dromedary chromosome-specific probes were described previously [6,32] and were labeled by DOP-PCR [37] with biotin-16-dUTP or digoxigenin-dUTP (Roche, Basel, Switzerland).

2.4. FISH Procedure

Dual-color FISH experiments on G-banded metaphase chromosomes were conducted as described by Yang and Graphodatsky [32]. Tripsin-treated chromosomes were immobilized in 0.5% formaldehyde in PBS followed by formamid denaturing and overnight probe hybridization at 40 °C. Digoxigenin-labeled probes were detected using anti-digoxigenin-CyTM3 (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories, Inc., West Grove, PA, whereas biotin-labeled probes were identified with avidin-FITC (Vector Laboratories) and anti-avidin FITC (Vector Laboratories, Inc., Burlingame, CA, USA). Images were captured and processed using VideoTesT 2.0 Image Analysis System (Zenit, St. Petersburg, Russia) and a Baumer Optronics CCD camera mounted on a BX53 microscope (Olympus, Shinjuku, Japan).

3. Results

3.1. Comparative Chromosome Map of Musk Ox, Dromedary, and Human

The musk ox karyotype includes six submetacentric and 17 acrocentric autosomes and one sex chromosomal pair (2N = 48) (Figure 1). The fundamental number of autosomal arms in musk ox is 58, which in general is characteristic for karyotypes of the Bovidae family [18]. To establish the genome-wide chromosome comparative map of the musk ox, human and dromedary painting probes were used. The chromosome map (Figure 1) and additional comparison with cattle chromosomes (the reference karyotype for ruminants) and with pecoran ancestral karyotype (PAK) are summarized in Table 2. The painting probes from 22 human (HSA) and 35 dromedary (CDR) autosomal paints revealed 51 and 61 conserved segments on the musk ox karyotype, respectively.
We studied the distribution of repeated sequences in the musk ox karyotype using several methods. FISH analysis revealed the localization of telomere repeat and ribosomal DNA sequences. Six nucleolar organizing regions (NORs) with telomeric localization on OMO 1, OMO 2 and OMO 8 chromosome pairs were identified (Figure 1). Telomeric repeats are situated on terminal regions of chromosomes. The CDAG differential staining revealed centromeric and telomeric GC-enriched heterochromatin with prominent AT- and GC-enriched pericentromeric blocks of heterochromatin on acrocentric chromosomes (Figure 2). Smaller blocks of heterochromatin were observed on meta- and submetacentric chromosomes, except chromosome 6, where a large block of heterochromatin was identified. Enlarged telomeric blocks were observed on at least 3 pairs of autosomes, while only two pairs of small acrocentrics appeared to have repeated sequences distributed over the whole chromosome.

3.2. Mapping of the X Chromosome in Bovidae

To investigate the order of conserved syntenic segments on X chromosomes in the Bovidae family, 26 BAC-clones were localized using FISH on X chromosomes of four species (nilgai bull, saola, gaur, and Kirk’s Dikdik) in a series of pairwise FISH experiments (Table 3). In all Bovinae species, similar order of BAC-clones was observed. The same order was observed earlier in Antilopinae subfamily, except for the marker inversion in Caprini [15]. In total, comparative analysis of BAC order revealed identical syntenic blocks: X Syntenic Block 1 (13 BACs, XSB1), X Syntenic Block 2 (7 BACs, XSB2), and X Syntenic Block 3 (6 BACs, XSB3) [15]. Two types of chromosome X changes were identified in a course of Bovidae evolution: a centromere reposition, and inversions of an entire syntenic block. Interestingly, a segmental duplication in XSB3 containing CH-108D16 was detected on saola X (Figure 3).

4. Discussion

4.1. Evolution of Musk Ox and Bovid Karyotypes

Prior G-banding karyotypes of musk ox [25,26] revealed five fusions that formed submetacentric chromosomes described using cattle microdissected chromosomes [14]. Here, a complete high-resolution comparative map for musk ox karyotype was obtained using human and camel chromosome specific probes and compared to cattle karyotype (Table 2). Our results are in agreement with previous publications showing the origin of musk ox submetacentric chromosomes [14].
We show the presence of prominent heterochromatin blocks at centromeric positions in the musk ox karyotype. Many bovid species are characterized by prominent pericentromeric blocks of heterochromatin and their karyotype evolution is marked by frequent occurrence of Robertsonian fusions [2,18]. Several hypotheses point to the role that repetitive sequences may have in driving chromosome evolution in bovids by increasing the occurrence of Robertsonian translocations due to the physical proximity of centromeres of acrocentric chromosomes during meiosis [38]. As shown previously, repetitive sequences were involved in formation of Robertsonian translocations in mice [38]. Therefore, the presence of heterochromatic blocks on acrocentric chromosomes in bovid species may contribute to the high variability of bovid karyotypes, including the occurrence of cytotypes in many species, high frequency of Robertsonian fusions, and autosome to the X chromosome translocations.
Overall, the obtained comparative map indicates that musk ox karyotype is nearly homologous to the pecoran ancestral karyotype [5] (Table 2). The comparison of the ancestral elements of the musk ox with other pecoran species demonstrates the rearrangements that formed its karyotype, but also more events occurring in different lineages (Figure 5). The musk ox karyotype has evolved from PAK through six fusions (CDR 1 + 2/32, CDR 20 + 5/13, CDR 18 + 12/34/12, CDR 26 + 28/15/28/15/4, CDR 33/10 + 24/30, and CDR 4+17), one fission (CDR 11), and three inversions (on HSA 21/3/21, CDR 22/3/22/3, HSA 12pq’/22q’’12pq’/22q’’) (Figure 4). It is characterized by inversions on ancestral elements A2, C2, E, and a split of U.
The musk ox is a representative of subfamily Antilopinae, Caprini tribe. Both comparative linkage and FISH maps showed one major distinction between ovine (Antilopinae, Caprini) and bovine (Bovinae) karyotypes. This difference resulted from a translocation involving segments homologous to BTA 9 and BTA 14 [4,7,39]. However, this association is not observed in musk ox. Presumably, this is determined by the basal position of Ovibovina [40], suggesting that the BTA 9/14 translocation occurred only in Caprina subtribe.
The ancestral form of PAC A2 is similar to pronghorn (AAM) 1q [5]. However, other bovid species and Moschidae (Siberian musk deer) [30] showed an inversion changing the order of homologous segments into HSA 21/3/21 (Figure 4). Therefore, this inversion likely represents a cytogenetic marker for at least Bovidae+Moschidae. The verification of this human syntenic association is needed in Cervidae where the fission of the synteny was shown for Muntiacus muntjac [41]. Although Cervidae have been well studied with bovid [42] and muntjac [41] probes, comparison to human probes is still unknown, hindering the deduction of ancestral rearrangements.
The ancestral pecoran synteny PAK C2 represents an interesting case. An inversion in HSA 12pq’/22q’’ occurred independently in different phylogenetic lineages in Pecora (Antilocapridae, Moschidae, Bovina, Caprina) (Figure 4) [16]. Therefore, there is a hot spot of chromosome evolution in the region homologous to HSA12pq’/22q’’ in Pecora. Additional investigation is required to verify if this inversion occurred in the same region, with an in-depth analysis of the DNA sequence surrounding this region needed to elucidate the genomic elements causing repeated rearrangements. Contrary to what has been previously suggested [5], this ancestral PAK chromosome C2 was composed of HSA 12/22, and not of HSA 12/22/12/22, because the outgroup and many species from basal lineages have the HSA 12/22 association (whales, Java mouse deer, giraffe, okapi, saola, hirola) [5,11,30,43]. Similarly, the independent inversions in PAK chromosome E (CDR 22/3/22/3/22/3) in BTA 7 (Bovina), OAR 5, OMO 8 (Caprini) (CDR 22/3/22/3), and giraffe (Giraffidae) [30], while ancestral conditions were retained in Java mouse deer, pronghorn, Siberian musk deer and saola, mark another hot spot of chromosome evolution that requires further study.
During FISH experiments on the localization of CDR 22 on OMO chromosomes, an additional small region of homology on OMO 22 was detected. This region was also detected in other Bovidae species: cow, sheep (Figure 5), and saola [5]. The sequence homologies of HSA5 = BTA20 are confirmed by ENSEMBLE genome browser data, also blast data of alpaca RH markers from the chromosome homologous to CDR22 show homology with BTA20 (unpublished data). The order of conservative segments on BTA7 is HSA19p/5 and CDR22/3/22/3. These data differ from research published previously reporting HSA5/19p/5 and CDR3/22/3/22 [6].
The split of the ancestral element PAK U is shown in musk ox and also in PNG, BTA, OAR, and DHU karyotypes, thus suggesting that this fission is a marker for the Bovidae lineage [5].
On another ancestral chromosome, PAK N1 centromere reposition events occurred independently on homologous chromosomes in several bovid lineages (Pseudoryina, Ovibovina, Alcelaphini) (Figure 5). Further refinement of the ancestral chromosome N1 was achieved (Figure 4), showing that the order of human syntenic regions on the PAK ancestral chromosome N1 is HSA 22’/12’’/4pq and not 12’/22’’/4pq, as was reported earlier [5]. OMO 1p (HSA 22q/12pq’’/4pq) retained the ancestral order of conserved segments N1 but was then tandemly fused with PAK A2 based on the position of the ancestral centromere.

4.2. Bovine X Chromosome Evolution

The family Bovidae includes two major branches: Bovinae and Antilopinae [40]. Earlier cytogenetic studies identified three types of morphological diversity of the X chromosome in Bovidae: an antilopinae type (acrocentric), a tragelaphines type (acrocentric), and a cattle type (submetacentric) [20]. Tragelaphines chromosome X was likely formed from the ancestral pecoran X by two inversions. This type is ancestral in Bovinae and presented in nilgai, saola (Figure 6), and domestic river buffalo [44]. The X chromosome in nilgai and saola are marked by several morphological features. The first one is an autosomal translocation onto chromosome X in nilgai karyotype. In Tragelaphini and Boselaphini tribes, independent autosomal translocations were observed [9,23,45,46]. Such rearrangements have an impact on the behavior of chromosomes in meiosis, manifested as a lowering of synapsis in the pseudoautosomal region [45]. The second one is a segmental duplication of sequences homologous to CH-108D16 in saola (PNG) (Table 3). Unfortunately, we cannot determine whether this segmental duplication is characteristic for the entire species due to the lack of information of other individuals. However, the duplicated region contains genes responsible for intrauterine development and may have an adaptive value.
The cattle subtype of the Х chromosome is formed by centromere reposition of the ancestral X chromosome in Bovinae. This type of the X chromosome is presented in cattle, American bison [15], and gaur (Figure 6). Thus, it appears to be characteristic not only of cattle, but of the whole subtribe Bovina.
The centromere reposition and one inversion resulted in the formation of an acrocentric caprine type of the X chromosome [15]. This type of the X chromosome is retained in Kirk’s Dikdik and sable antelope [15]. We suggest calling this type of bovid the X – Antilopine type. Another inversion, which occurred within the XSB1 in the Caprini lineage, is an apomorphic phylogenetic marker for this tribe [15] and marks the formation of the Caprini subtype of X. The mapping of Panthalops hodgsonii X chromosome would assert this type for the whole Caprini tribe.
In general, the X chromosome is highly conserved in eutherians [19], but several different types of chromosome rearrangements on the cetartiodactyl X have been shown [15]. It was suggested that the evolutionary chromosome rearrangements may reduce gene flow by suppressing recombination and contributing to species isolation [47]. However, in ruminant species, several evolutionary breakpoint regions (EBR) on the X chromosome associated with enhancers were described that may change gene expression [16]. Therefore, these rearrangements may have an adaptive value and an evolutionary meaning.
Overall, we can distinguish four types of the X chromosome in Bovidae: Bovinae type with derived cattle subtype; and Antilopinae type with Caprini subtype. The Bovinae type was formed from the ancestral pecoran X by two inversions, whereas the Antilopinae type was formed by inversion and centromere reposition. The Cattle and Caprini subtypes were created by centromere repositions and inversion in XSB1, respectively.

5. Conclusions

Detailed comparative maps were obtained for musk ox karyotype and X chromosomes of four bovids: Kirk’s Dikdik, gaur, saola, and nilgai bull. Large structural rearrangements leading to the formation of the karyotype of the musk ox were shown. In general, its karyotype is close to the putative ancestral karyotype of Pecora infraorder. The detailed analysis of the BAC-clones order across four species and published data allowed illustrating chromosomal rearrangements during the formation of four main types of X chromosomes in the Bovidae family. In summary, conservation in BACs order was shown in the Bovinae and Antilopinae subfamilies.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.I.K. and A.S.G.; Data curation, A.A.P. and P.L.P.; Formal analysis, A.A.P.; Funding acquisition, D.M.L. and A.S.G.; Investigation, A.A.P., A.I.K. and N.A.L.; Methodology, A.A.P. and A.I.K.; Project administration, A.S.G.; Resources, P.L.P., D.V.Y., N.A.L., I.M.O., E.V.K., M.F., D.M.L., M.B., M.E.R.-P. and S.J.O.; Software, M.F. and D.M.L.; Supervision, A.I.K.; Visualization, A.A.P.; Writing—original draft, A.A.P.; Writing—review & editing, P.L.P., M.F., D.M.L. and S.J.O.

Funding

The work was supported by a research grant of the Russian Science Foundation (RSF, 19-14-00034), the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (Grant BB/P020062/1 to D.M.L.), and Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR) grant 17-00-00145 (D.M.L.).

Acknowledgments

We would like to sincerely thank Malcolm A. Ferguson-Smith, Fengtang Yang and Patricia CM O’Brien for kindly providing the sets of human and dromedary camel chromosome-specific painting probes. We would like to sincerely thank Nicolai Mamaev (Institute for Biological Problems of Cryolithozone Siberian Branch of RAS, Russia) to helping in providing musk ox samples. We would like to sincerely thank Mitchell Bush (Conservation and Research Center, National Zoological Park, Virginia, USA), Doug Armstrong (Henry Doorly Zoo, OMAHA, NE, USA), Melody Roelke (NIH, Bethesda, USA), June Bellizzi and director Richard Hahn (Catoctin wildlife Zoo and Preserve, MD, USA) for kindly providing samples. We would like to thank Mary Thompson (NCI-Frederick, USA) for establishing cell lines.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Wilson, D.E.; Reeder, D.M. Mammal Species of The World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference; JHU Press: Baltimore, MD, USA, 2005; Volume 1. [Google Scholar]
  2. Robinson, T.J.; Ropiquet, A. Examination of hemiplasy, homoplasy and phylogenetic discordance in chromosomal evolution of the Bovidae. Syst. Biol. 2011, 60, 439–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Zurano, J.P.; Magalhães, F.M.; Asato, A.E.; Silva, G.; Bidau, C.J.; Mesquita, D.O.; Costa, G.C. Cetartiodactyla: Updating a time-calibrated molecular phylogeny. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2019, 133, 256–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Chi, J.X.; Huang, L.; Nie, W.; Wang, J.; Su, B.; Yang, F. Defining the orientation of the tandem fusions that occurred during the evolution of Indian muntjac chromosomes by BAC mapping. Chromosoma 2005, 114, 167–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Kulemzina, A.I.; Perelman, P.L.; Grafodatskaya, D.A.; Nguyen, T.T.; Thompson, M.; Roelke-Parker, M.E.; Graphodatsky, A.S. Comparative chromosome painting of pronghorn (Antilocapra americana) and saola (Pseudoryx nghetinhensis) karyotypes with human and dromedary camel probes. BMC Genet. 2014, 15, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Balmus, G.; Trifonov, V.A.; Biltueva, L.S.; O’Brien, P.C.; Alkalaeva, E.S.; Fu, B.; Skidmore, J.A.; Allen, T.; Graphodatsky, A.S.; Yang, F.; et al. Cross-species chromosome painting among camel, cattle, pig and human: Further insights into the putative Cetartiodactyla ancestral karyotype. Chromosome Res. 2007, 15, 499–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Iannuzzi, L.; Di Meo, G.P.; Perucatti, A.; Schibler, L.; Incarnato, D.; Cribiu, E.P. Comparative FISH mapping in river buffalo and sheep chromosomes: Assignment of forty autosomal type I loci from sixteen human chromosomes. Cytogenet. Genome Res. 2001, 94, 43–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Rubes, J.; Kubickova, S.; Pagacova, E.; Cernohorska, H.; Di Berardino, D.; Antoninova, M.; Vahala, J.; Robinson, T.J. Phylogenomic study of spiral-horned antelope by cross-species chromosome painting. Chromosome Res. 2008, 16, 935–947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Cernohorska, H.; Kubickova, S.; Vahala, J.; Robinson, T.J.; Rubes, J. Cytotypes of Kirk’s dik-dik (Madoqua kirkii, Bovidae) show multiple tandem fusions. Cytogenet. Genome Res. 2011, 132, 255–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Iannuzzi, L.; Di Meo, G.P.; Perucatti, A.; Bardaro, T. ZOO-FISH and R-banding reveal extensive conservation of human chromosome regions in euchromatic regions of river buffalo chromosomes. Cytogenet. Genome Res. 1998, 82, 210–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Chaves, R.; Frönicke, L.; Guedes-Pinto, H.; Wienberg, J. Multidirectional chromosome painting between the Hirola antelope (Damaliscus hunteri, Alcelaphini, Bovidae), sheep and human. Chromosome Res. 2004, 12, 495–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  12. Buckland, R.A.; Evans, H.J. Cytogenetic aspects of phylogeny in the Bovidae. Cytogenet. Genome Res. 1978, 21, 42–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Pagacova, E.; Cernohorska, H.; Kubickova, S.; Vahala, J.; Rubes, J. Centric fusion polymorphism in captive animals of family Bovidae. Conserv. Genet. 2011, 12, 71–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Rubes, J.; Musilova, P.; Kopecna, O.; Kubickova, S.; Cernohorska, H.; Kulemsina, A.I. Comparative molecular cytogenetics in Cetartiodactyla. Cytogenet. Genome Res. 2012, 137, 194–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Proskuryakova, A.A.; Kulemzina, A.I.; Perelman, P.L.; Makunin, A.I.; Larkin, D.M.; Farré, M.; Kukekova, A.V.; Johnson, J.L.; Lemskaya, N.A.; Beklemisheva, V.R.; et al. X Chromosome Evolution in Cetartiodactyla. Genes 2017, 8, 216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Farré, M.; Kim, J.; Proskuryakova, A.A.; Zhang, Y.; Kulemzina, A.I.; Li, Q.; Zhou, Y.; Xiong, Y.; Johnson, J.L.; Perelman, P.L. Evolution of gene regulation in ruminants differs between evolutionary breakpoint regions and homologous synteny blocks. Genome Res. 2019, 29, 576–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Slate, J.; Van Stijn, T.C.; Anderson, R.M.; McEwan, K.M.; Maqbool, N.J.; Mathias, H.C.; Bixley, M.J.; Stevens, D.R.; Molenaar, A.J.; Beever, J.E.; et al. A deer (subfamily Cervinae) genetic linkage map and the evolution of ruminant genomes. Genetics 2002, 160, 1587–1597. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  18. Gallagher, D.S., Jr.; Womack, J.E. Chromosome conservation in the Bovidae. J. Hered. 1992, 83, 287–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Ohno, S.; Beçak, W.; Beçak, M.L. X-autosome ratio and the behavior pattern of individual X-chromosomes in placental mammals. Chromosoma 1964, 15, 14–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Robinson, T.J.; Harrison, W.R.; Ponce de Leon, F.A.; Davis, S.K.; Elder, F.F.B. A molecular cytogenetic analysis of X chromosome repatterning in the Bovidae: Transpositions, inversions, and phylogenetic inference. Cytogenet. Genome Res. 1998, 80, 179–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Iannuzzi, L.; King, W.A.; Di Berardino, D. Chromosome evolution in domestic bovids as revealed by chromosome banding and FISH-mapping techniques. Cytogenet. Genome Res. 2009, 126, 49–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Cernohorska, H.; Kubickova, S.; Vahala, J.; Rubes, J. Molecular insights into X; BTA5 chromosome rearrangements in the tribe Antilopini (Bovidae). Cytogenet. Genome Res. 2012, 136, 188–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Gallagher, D.S.; Davis, S.K.; De Donato, M.; Burzlaff, J.D.; Womack, J.E.; Taylor, J.F.; Kumamoto, A.T. A karyotypic analysis of nilgai, Boselaphus tragocamelus (Artiodactyla: Bovidae). Chromosome Res. 1998, 6, 505–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Lent, P.C. Ovibos moschatus. Mamm. Species 1988, 302, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Biltueva, L.S.; Sharshov, A.A.; Graphodatsky, A.S. G-Banding Homologies in Musk Ox, Ovibos moschatus, and other Bovids. Hereditas 1995, 122, 185–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Pasitschniak-Arts, M.; Flood, P.F.; Schmutz, S.M.; Seidel, B. A Comparison of G-Band Patterns of The Muskox and Takin and Their Evolutionary Relationship to Sheep; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  27. Desaulniers, D.M.; King, W.A.; Rowell, J.E.; Flood, P.F. The banded chromosomes of the muskox (Ovibos moschatus). Can. J. Zool. 1989, 67, 1155–1158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Huang, L.; Nie, W.; Wang, J.; Su, W.; Yang, F. Phylogenomic study of the subfamily Caprinae by cross-species chromosome painting with Chinese muntjac paints. Chromosome Res. 2005, 13, 389–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Kulemzina, A.I.; Yang, F.; Trifonov, V.A.; Ryder, O.A.; Ferguson-Smith, M.A.; Graphodatsky, A.S. Chromosome painting in Tragulidae facilitates the reconstruction of Ruminantia ancestral karyotype. Chromosome Res. 2011, 19, 531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Kulemzina, A.I.; Trifonov, V.A.; Perelman, P.L.; Rubtsova, N.V.; Volobuev, V.; Ferguson-Smith, M.A.; Stanyon, R.; Yang, F.; Graphodatsky, A.S. Cross-species chromosome painting in Cetartiodactyla: Reconstructing the karyotype evolution in key phylogenetic lineages. Chromosome Res. 2009, 17, 419–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Yang, F.; O’Brien, P.C.M.; Milne, B.S.; Graphodatsky, A.S.; Solanky, N.; Trifonov, V.; Rens, W.; Sargan, D.; Ferguson-Smith, M.A. A complete comparative chromosome map for the dog, red fox, and human and its integration with canine genetic maps. Genomics 1999, 62, 189–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Yang, F.; Graphodatsky, A.S. Animal probes and ZOO-FISH. In Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization (FISH); Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017; pp. 323–346. [Google Scholar]
  33. Seabright, M. A rapid banding technique for human chromosomes. The Lancet 1971, 2, 971–972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Lemskaya, N.A.; Kulemzina, A.I.; Beklemisheva, V.R.; Biltueva, L.S.; Proskuryakova, A.A.; Perelman, P.L.; Graphodatsky, A.S. The combined method of heterogeneous heterochromatin detection (CDAG) in different mammalian species. Chromosoma 2018, 26, 307–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Proskuryakova, A.; Kulemzina, A.; Perelman, P.; Serdukova, N.; Ryder, O.; Graphodatsky, A. The Case of X and Y Localization of Nucleolus Organizer Regions (NORs) in Tragulus javanicus (Cetartiodactyla, Mammalia). Genes 2018, 9, 312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Ijdo, J.W.; Wells, R.A.; Baldini, A.; Reeders, S.T. Improved telomere detection using a telomere repeat probe (TTAGGG) n generated by PCR. Nucleic Acids Res. 1991, 19, 4780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Telenius, H.; Ponder, B.A.; Tunnacliffe, A.; Pelmear, A.H.; Carter, N.P.; Ferguson-Smith, M.A.; Behmel, A.; Nordenskjöld, M.; Pfragner, R. Cytogenetic analysis by chromosome painting using DOP-PCR amplified flow-sorted chromosomes. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 1992, 4, 257–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Berrios del Solar, M.S.; Manieu Seguel, C.; López Fenner, J.; Ayarza Ramírez, G.; Page, J.; González Vergara, M.; Manterola Zúñiga, M.; Fernández Donoso, R. Robertsonian chromosomes and the nuclear architecture of mouse meiotic prophase spermatocytes. Biol. Res. 2014, 47, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. De Gortari, M.J.; Freking, B.A.; Cuthbertson, R.P.; Kappes, S.M.; Keele, J.W.; Stone, R.T.; Leymaster, K.A.; Dodds, K.G.; Crawford, A.M.; Beattie, C.W. A second-generation linkage map of the sheep genome. Mamm. Genome 1998, 9, 204–209. [Google Scholar]
  40. Hassanin, A.; Delsuc, F.; Ropiquet, A.; Hammer, C.; van Vuuren, B.J.; Matthee, C.; Ruiz-Garcia, M.; Catzeflis, F.; Areskoug, V.; Nguyen, T.T.; et al. Pattern and timing of diversification of Cetartiodactyla (Mammalia, Laurasiatheria), as revealed by a comprehensive analysis of mitochondrial genomes. C. R. Biol. 2012, 335, 32–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Yang, F.; Müller, S.; Just, R.; Ferguson-Smith, M.A.; Wienberg, J. Comparative chromosome painting in mammals: Human and the Indian muntjac (Muntiacus muntjak vaginalis). Genomics 1997, 39, 396–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Frohlich, J.; Kubickova, S.; Musilova, P.; Cernohorska, H.; Muskova, H.; Vodicka, R.; Rubes, J. Karyotype relationships among selected deer species and cattle revealed by bovine FISH probes. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0187559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Kulemzina, A.I.; Proskuryakova, A.A.; Beklemisheva, V.R.; Lemskaya, N.A.; Perelman, P.L.; Graphodatsky, A.S. Comparative Chromosome Map and Heterochromatin Features of the Gray Whale Karyotype (Cetacea). Cytogenet. Genome Res. 2016, 148, 25–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Iannuzzi, L.; Di Meo, G.P.; Perucatti, A.; Incarnato, D.; Schibler, L.; Cribiu, E.P. Comparative FISH mapping of bovid X chromosomes reveals homologies and divergences between the subfamilies Bovinae and Caprinae. Cytogenet. Genome Res. 2000, 89, 171–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Vozdova, M.; Ruiz-Herrera, A.; Fernandez, J.; Cernohorska, H.; Frohlich, J.; Sebestova, H.; Kubickova, S.; Rubes, J. Meiotic behaviour of evolutionary sex-autosome translocations in Bovidae. Chromosome Res. 2016, 24, 325–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. O’Brien, S.J.; Menninger, J.C.; Nash, W.G. Atlas of Mammalian Chromosomes; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  47. Rieseberg, L.H. Chromosomal rearrangements and speciation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2001, 16, 351–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Genes 10 00857 g001 550
Figure 1. Comparative chromosome painting map of musk ox with homologies to human (HSA) and dromedary (CDR). Nucleolar organizing regions (NOR) show the localization of the nucleolar organizing region.
Figure 1. Comparative chromosome painting map of musk ox with homologies to human (HSA) and dromedary (CDR). Nucleolar organizing regions (NOR) show the localization of the nucleolar organizing region.
Genes 10 00857 g001
Genes 10 00857 g002 550
Figure 2. Chromomycin A3-DAPI after G-banding (CDAG) staining performed on metaphase chromosomes of musk ox: GTG-banding (left) and CMA3/DAPI-staining after denaturation and renaturation procedure (right).
Figure 2. Chromomycin A3-DAPI after G-banding (CDAG) staining performed on metaphase chromosomes of musk ox: GTG-banding (left) and CMA3/DAPI-staining after denaturation and renaturation procedure (right).
Genes 10 00857 g002
Genes 10 00857 g003 550
Figure 3. The duplication of the X chromosome segment in Pseudoryx nghetinhensis (PNG) shown by dual color FISH of cattle BAC-clones (pink and green) from CHORI-240 library. Three FISH experiments illustrate the revealed order of BACs on the X chromosome: 386M8, 108D16, 54D24, 93K24, 108D16. White arrows indicate the duplicated region corresponding to 108D16: 1, 2 –54D24 and 93K24 are between duplicated regions, 3 –386M8 is outside of duplicated region.
Figure 3. The duplication of the X chromosome segment in Pseudoryx nghetinhensis (PNG) shown by dual color FISH of cattle BAC-clones (pink and green) from CHORI-240 library. Three FISH experiments illustrate the revealed order of BACs on the X chromosome: 386M8, 108D16, 54D24, 93K24, 108D16. White arrows indicate the duplicated region corresponding to 108D16: 1, 2 –54D24 and 93K24 are between duplicated regions, 3 –386M8 is outside of duplicated region.
Genes 10 00857 g003
Genes 10 00857 g004 550
Figure 4. A scheme depicting chromosome homologies of pecoran species to the ancestral karyotype chromosomes (PAK) [5] with human homologies on the left and dromedary on the right. Presented species include AAM (Antilocapra americana) [5], MMO (Moschus moschiferus) [30], and representatives of different Bovidae tribes: PNG (Pseudoryx nghetinhensis) [5], BTA (Bos taurus) [6] (Bovini), OAR (Ovis aries) [10], OMO (Ovibos moschatus) (Caprini), DHU (Damaliscus hunteri) [11] (Alcelaphini). Centromere positions are shown by an asterisk. New data obtained in this study are marked by a black circle in cell corners.
Figure 4. A scheme depicting chromosome homologies of pecoran species to the ancestral karyotype chromosomes (PAK) [5] with human homologies on the left and dromedary on the right. Presented species include AAM (Antilocapra americana) [5], MMO (Moschus moschiferus) [30], and representatives of different Bovidae tribes: PNG (Pseudoryx nghetinhensis) [5], BTA (Bos taurus) [6] (Bovini), OAR (Ovis aries) [10], OMO (Ovibos moschatus) (Caprini), DHU (Damaliscus hunteri) [11] (Alcelaphini). Centromere positions are shown by an asterisk. New data obtained in this study are marked by a black circle in cell corners.
Genes 10 00857 g004
Genes 10 00857 g005 550
Figure 5. Localization of CDR 22 (green) and CDR 3 (pink) on BTA (Bos taurus), OAR (Ovis aries), and OMO (Ovibos moschatus) metaphase chromosomes by FISH showing additional previously unreported by painting fragment homologous to CDR22. White arrows indicate chromosomes with specific signal.
Figure 5. Localization of CDR 22 (green) and CDR 3 (pink) on BTA (Bos taurus), OAR (Ovis aries), and OMO (Ovibos moschatus) metaphase chromosomes by FISH showing additional previously unreported by painting fragment homologous to CDR22. White arrows indicate chromosomes with specific signal.
Genes 10 00857 g005
Genes 10 00857 g006 550
Figure 6. Changes in the structure of the Bovidae X chromosome are depicted on the phylogenetic tree of the family (the tree topology is from [40]). PAX is Pecoran ancestral X chromosome [15]. Major conservative segments are shown in yellow, blue, and pink. Centromere positions are designated by a black circle. White arrowheads show the orientation of the conservative segments. Chromosome changes are shown on phylogenetic tree near respective branches: CR—centromere reposition; and Inv—inversion. Frames show types and subtypes of the bovid X chromosome. The timescale is in million years (MY) of evolution. Nilgai bull X chromosome is shown without autosomal translocation.
Figure 6. Changes in the structure of the Bovidae X chromosome are depicted on the phylogenetic tree of the family (the tree topology is from [40]). PAX is Pecoran ancestral X chromosome [15]. Major conservative segments are shown in yellow, blue, and pink. Centromere positions are designated by a black circle. White arrowheads show the orientation of the conservative segments. Chromosome changes are shown on phylogenetic tree near respective branches: CR—centromere reposition; and Inv—inversion. Frames show types and subtypes of the bovid X chromosome. The timescale is in million years (MY) of evolution. Nilgai bull X chromosome is shown without autosomal translocation.
Genes 10 00857 g006
Table
Table 1. The list of Bovidae cell lines used in this study.
Table 1. The list of Bovidae cell lines used in this study.
Scientific Name, AbbreviationCommon NameSubfamilyDiploid NumberSample/Cell Line Source/Acknowledgment
Ovibos moschatus, OMOMusk oxAntilopinae
(Caprini)		48, XXAllaikhovsky District, Sakha Republic, Yakutia, Russia. IMCB SB RAS, Novosibirsk
Ovis aries musimon, OARSheepAntilopinae (Caprini)54, XXMelody Roelke and June Bellizzi, Catoctin Wildlife Preserve and Zoo, Maryland, USA; Laboratory of Genomic Diversity, NCI-Frederick, MD, USA
Madoqua kirkii, MKIKirk’s DikdikAntilopinae
(Antilopini)		48, XYMitchell Bush, Conservation and Research Center, National Zoological Park, Virginia, USA; Laboratory of Genomic Diversity, NCI-Frederick, MD, USA
Bos taurus, BTACattleBovinae (Bovini)60, XXIMCB SB RAS, Novosibirsk.
Bos gaurus, BGAGaurBovinae
(Bovini)		58, XXDoug Armstrong, Henry Doorly Zoo, Omaha, NE, USA; Laboratory of Genomic Diversity, NCI-Frederick, MD, USA
Pseudoryx nghetinhensis, PNGSaolaBovinae
(Bovini)		50, XX[5]
Boselaphus tragocamelus, BTRNilgai bullBovinae (Boselaphini)44, X+14, X+14Melody Roelke and June Bellizzi, Catoctin Wildlife Preserve and Zoo, Maryland, USA; Laboratory of Genomic Diversity, NCI-Frederick, MD, USA
Table
Table 2. Correspondence between conserved chromosomal segments in musk ox (OMO), human (HSA), dromedary (CDR), cattle (BTA) and Pecoran ancestral karyotype (PAK) [5] revealed by chromosome painting. The order of conservative segments is started from centromere.
Table 2. Correspondence between conserved chromosomal segments in musk ox (OMO), human (HSA), dromedary (CDR), cattle (BTA) and Pecoran ancestral karyotype (PAK) [5] revealed by chromosome painting. The order of conservative segments is started from centromere.
OMOHSACDRBTAPAK
1p 22q’/12q”/4pq32/217N1
1q21/3/2111A2
2p6p2023R
2q2q”/15/132B2
3p16p/71825T
3q12pq’/22q”/12pq’/22q”12/34/125C2
4p4/8p”2627V
4q2pq/928/15/28/15/411C1
5p1110/33/1029W
5q1830/24/3024S
6p10q1128U
6q31722Q
74pq26F
819p/522/3/22/37E
9121/9/133A1
108p’/9/8p’/931/4/31/48B1
11123/21/13/21/2316K
12774D
1315/14/15/14610G
146q89H1
1516q/19p918M
1615/1427/621P
17131412I
1820/10p/2019/35/1913J
191110/33/1015L
20171619N2
218q25/29/2514H2
22522/320O
2310q1126U
XXXXX
Table
Table 3. The order of 26 CHORI-240 BACs on Bovidae X chromosomes. The color of the cells corresponds to a given conserved syntenic segment. To display the complete scheme of evolution in Bovidae, the X chromosome maps published previously are also presented [15]. The region duplicated in saola and inverted in Caprini is labeled with a lighter colour.
Table 3. The order of 26 CHORI-240 BACs on Bovidae X chromosomes. The color of the cells corresponds to a given conserved syntenic segment. To display the complete scheme of evolution in Bovidae, the X chromosome maps published previously are also presented [15]. The region duplicated in saola and inverted in Caprini is labeled with a lighter colour.
Syntenic BlockX BAC’s Order in Bovinae SubfamilyX BAC’s Order in Antilopinae Subfamily
In Most BovinaeIn SaolaCaprini TribeHippotragini and Antilopini Tribe
X syntenic block 1 (XSB1)CH240-514O22CH240-514O22CH240-66H2CH240-66H2
CH240-287O21CH240-287O21CH240-155A13CH240-155A13
CH240-128C9CH240-128C9
CH240-106A3		CH240-90L14CH240-90L14
CH240-106A3CH240-373L23CH240-373L23
CH240-229I15CH240-229I15CH240-62M10CH240-62M10
CH240-103E10CH240-103E10CH240-122P17CH240-122P17
CH240-386M8CH240-386M8CH240-252G15CH240-252G15
X syntenic block 2 (XSB2)CH240-108D16CH240-108D16CH240-375C5CH240-375C5
CH240-54D24CH240-54D24CH240-130I15CH240-130I15
CH240-93K24CH240-93K24CH240-118P13CH240-118P13
CH240-108D16
CH240-122N13CH240-122N13CH240-25P8CH240-25P8
CH240-195J23CH240-195J23CH240-14O10CH240-14O10
CH240-316D2CH240-316D2CH240-214A3CH240-214A3
X syntenic block 3 (XSB3)CH240-214A3CH240-214A3CH240-386M8CH240-386M8
CH240-14O10CH240-14O10CH240-103E10CH240-103E10
CH240-25P8CH240-25P8CH240-128C9CH240-229I15
CH240-118P13CH240-118P13CH240-106A3CH240-106A3
CH240-130I15CH240-130I15CH240-229I15CH240-128C9
CH240-375C5CH240-375C5CH240-287O21CH240-287O21
CH240-252G15CH240-252G15
CH240-122P17		CH240-514O22CH240-514O22
CH240-122P17CH240-316D2CH240-316D2
CH240-62M10CH240-62M10CH240-195J23CH240-195J23
CH240-373L23CH240-373L23CH240-122N13CH240-122N13
CH240-90L14CH240-90L14CH240-93K2CH240-93K2
CH240-155A13CH240-155A13CH240-54D24CH240-54D24
CH240-66H2CH240-66H2CH240-108D16CH240-108D16

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Proskuryakova, A.A.; Kulemzina, A.I.; Perelman, P.L.; Yudkin, D.V.; Lemskaya, N.A.; Okhlopkov, I.M.; Kirillin, E.V.; Farré, M.; Larkin, D.M.; Roelke-Parker, M.E.; et al. Comparative Chromosome Mapping of Musk Ox and the X Chromosome among Some Bovidae Species. Genes 2019, 10, 857. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes10110857

AMA Style

Proskuryakova AA, Kulemzina AI, Perelman PL, Yudkin DV, Lemskaya NA, Okhlopkov IM, Kirillin EV, Farré M, Larkin DM, Roelke-Parker ME, et al. Comparative Chromosome Mapping of Musk Ox and the X Chromosome among Some Bovidae Species. Genes. 2019; 10(11):857. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes10110857

Chicago/Turabian Style

Proskuryakova, Anastasia A., Anastasia I. Kulemzina, Polina L. Perelman, Dmitry V. Yudkin, Natalya A. Lemskaya, Innokentii M. Okhlopkov, Egor V. Kirillin, Marta Farré, Denis M. Larkin, Melody E. Roelke-Parker, and et al. 2019. "Comparative Chromosome Mapping of Musk Ox and the X Chromosome among Some Bovidae Species" Genes 10, no. 11: 857. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes10110857

APA Style

Proskuryakova, A. A., Kulemzina, A. I., Perelman, P. L., Yudkin, D. V., Lemskaya, N. A., Okhlopkov, I. M., Kirillin, E. V., Farré, M., Larkin, D. M., Roelke-Parker, M. E., O’Brien, S. J., Bush, M., & Graphodatsky, A. S. (2019). Comparative Chromosome Mapping of Musk Ox and the X Chromosome among Some Bovidae Species. Genes, 10(11), 857. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes10110857

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop