伴性遗传,限性遗传与从性遗传

伴性遗传、限性遗传与从性遗传殷康俊（安徽省铜陵有色铜山矿中学２４７１２７）伴性遗传（ｓｅｘ－ｌｉｎｋｅｄｉｎｈｅｒｉｔａｎｃｅ）是指性染色体上的基因所控制的性状在遗传方式上与性别相联系。在生物的性状中,还有限性性状和从性性状,这两类性状的遗传分别叫限...     

近视与遗传

近视在生理上表现为屈光不正。亚洲人群的近视发生率与几十年前相比迅速增加,而我国较发达的城市中多数人口已经或正在成为近视。近年来的研究已经报道了6种近视相关基因。从中国现代化进程和近视人口的迅速增长角度看,这种远远打破遗传平衡的变化已经不能用简单的基因突变或者孟德尔遗传来解释。城乡差别和受教育程度的比较可见,近视的成因受环境和基因两个方面的影响。近视直接关系国家发展和民族的健康,应当是全社会共同关注的一个重要课题。     

长寿与遗传

老年医学是近年来医学发展的一个新分 支,长寿问题又是老年医学及老龄问题的一个 重要内容。国内外学者对长寿与衰老曾有很多 论述,其中遗传学说已为很多学者所重视。 Hayflick首先提出“生物钟”学说,以后又发展成 遗传基因安排学说、遗传错误论和密码限制论、 遗传缺陷论等。Pealr等曾通过TIAL (Total immediate ancestral longevity）的配对调查证明 长寿受检者的TIAL明显高于对照组,认为长 寿与遗传有关。但关于系统论述长寿与遗传 关系及长寿的遗传规律等方面问题的报道还较 少。我们自1983年起对38名长寿老人及523 名亲属进行了较详细的调查分析,并设立对照 组（在职业、民族、籍贯、经济条件、居住环境、嗜 好、营养等方面与长寿老人相似者）进行比较, 现小结如下：     

分子病与遗传

現代医学的飞速发展,已帮助我們战胜了不少我們祖先所无法对付的疾病。但是,还有一些疾病——遺传性疾病,是医学家至今还很少方法或缺乏根本方法的。这些病的发病机制很奥妙,所采取的对付方法也迥然不同。随着传染性疾病的被控制,这类疾病已逐步被重視起来。本文就对这类疾病的最近生物化学和遺传学的研究情况举例介紹一下。人类对疾病的认識,随着科学的发展,已愈来愈深入了。魏尔嘯(Virchow)曾建立了細胞病理学的概念,企图在細胞及組織水平上回答病态破坏的本貭。这当然比原来人們对疾病的各种糊涂、玄妙的概念或甚至神秘莫測是进了一步。然而,由于現代生物化学及遺传学的发展,它的影响已不断渗入医学,以至我們現在所可能談論的,已經不只是細胞病理学,而有分子病理学了。“分子病”这是由鲍林(Pauling)所首先提出的一个专門名詞,其所指的是生物体中某种物貭(主要指高分子物貭)的分子結构(成分或空間构形)的某种异常而引起的疾病。現在,遺传学家和生物化学家所能认識的这类疾病,已經不是几种,而是几十种甚至上百种了。究竟分子病是怎么一回事呢?这必須从生物体內的有活性的生物高分子物貭的形成及其作用談起。在各种生物体內,与生命活动最有关系的物质有二类:卽核酸与蛋白貭。其中核酸主要是携带和传递遺传密碼;而蛋白貭在生物体中除去部分結构蛋白外,其最重要的作用是在代謝反应的各个阶段上起催化作用(或許也可能所有細胞內的結构蛋白都与催化有关)。核酸的生成及其在遺传过程中作用的发揮,必須靠蛋白貭的帮助才能实現;而蛋白质的生成則又决定于核酸所規定的方式或模型。     

寿命与遗传

人为什么会衰老 ?机体衰老时为什么容易生病呢 ?科学家们在探索衰老之谜时发现 ,寿命与许多因素有关 ,包括内在的遗传因素和外在的环境因素 ,其中最主要的还是与遗传因素有关。1　细胞的寿命细胞是生物体的基本组成单位 ,因此 ,在寿命问题的研究上也必须从细胞的寿命着手。实验证实 ,各种细胞如果能保持它的正常分裂能力 ,那么这类细胞就不会衰老 ,例如单细胞生物变形虫、革履虫和单细胞藻类就是如此 ;而分化很高的神经细胞 ,一般说它的分化能力已丧失 ,所以最后必然要死亡。由此可见 ,细胞的分裂和保持分裂能力 ,与寿命和衰老很有关系。根…     

精神分裂症遗传因素与遗传方式的探讨

木文对200例精神分裂症患者的遗传因素与遗传方式作了研究。分析了索引病例的家族遗传史、 家族成员的精神疾患分类、各级亲族的患病率及各种环境因素的作用。认为遗传因素在精神分裂症IyIJ 病因中具有重要意义,而环境因素对精神分裂症的发病亦起着不可忽视的作用。同时,通过统计分析, 指出精神分裂症的遗传方式为多基因遗传,其加权平均遗传率为60.46%.     

滇杨种群遗传多样性与遗传结构

滇杨(Populus yunnanensis)是我国西南地区的特有树种, 具有速生、易无性繁殖、适应性强等优良特性, 是典型的南方型杨属树种。研究滇杨遗传多样性及种群结构对其种质资源的收集、保存和利用具有重要的意义。本研究从我国滇杨主要分布区云南和四川共采集了6个种群, 包括云南的昭通(ZT)、会泽(HZ)、嵩明(SM)、洱源(EY)、拉市海(LS)以及四川的美姑(MG), 共64个个体, 利用34对SSR分子标记和3对cpDNA叶绿体标记开展遗传多样性与遗传结构研究。SSR引物共检测到154个等位基因, 平均等位基因数为4.529, 观测杂合度(Ho)与期望杂合度(He)分别为0.552和0.472, 遗传分化系数(Fst)平均值为0.238, 多态性信息含量指数(PIC)平均值为0.421, 基因流(Nm)为0.806。滇杨的遗传结构分析(DAPC)与遗传距离的主坐标分析(PCoA)、UPGMA聚类分析均将6个种群划分为3个亚类: 第І亚类包括昭通种群、会泽种群和嵩明种群的4个个体, 第ІІ亚类包括嵩明种群的6个个体以及洱源种群和拉市海种群, 第III亚类为美姑种群; 嵩明种群包含第І和第ІІ两个亚类的混合遗传成分。3个cpDNA联合序列中共检测到35个变异位点, 分为13个单倍型, 其中单倍型H5在种群中分布最为广泛, 其余的单倍型均为种群特有的单倍型。分子方差分析(AMOVA)表明种群内的遗传变异大于种群间变异。研究表明滇杨不同种群的遗传分化具有地域性, 可选择就地保护; 昭通种群遗传多样性最高, 且包含7种叶绿体单倍型, 单倍型类型最多, 应优先保护。     

磁场与遗传免疫

人体是极为复杂的导电体,体内大量体液导电性能良好。又由于人体受地磁的影响产生磁场,但人体磁场的数量级在10^-10～10^-13的范围内,因而总的来说人体的磁场是极弱磁场。实验得知,外磁场和地球磁场对生命活动的影响,称为磁场的生物效应。磁场的生物效应的应用是磁疗,即磁场疗法。     

遗传与进化感悟

生命是什么?从生物学的角度来说,生命是生物体所表现的自身繁殖、生长发育、新陈代谢、遗传变异以及对刺激产生反应等的复合现象,即生命是一个物质系统。但如果上升到更高的层面,我觉得生命是一种燃烧着的活力,是一个从生到死、再生再死的过程,并且能通过遗传的方式将这种活力和过程延伸下去。这种"延伸"不仅能对上一辈的生物体发挥着承接作用,而且能对后一代的生物体发挥着引导作用,故生物能够在遗传过程中得到不断的进化和发展。本文将从四个角度阐述生物的遗传和进化特性。     

遗传因素与癌

遗传因素与癌戴启明（南京市雨花台区卫生防疫站２１００１２）癌症每年造成世界上６００万人丧生,超过人类各种原因死亡总人数的１０％。这一“疾病之王”严重地威胁着人类生命和健康。环境中存在着多种多样的物理性、化学性和生物性致癌因子,它们在一定条件下诱发人体...     

On the origin of the Hirudinea and the demise of the Oligochaeta

The phylogenetic relationships of the Clitellata were investigated with a data set of published and new complete 18S rRNA gene sequences of 51 species representing 41 families. Sequences were aligned on the basis of a secondary structure model and analysed with maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood. In contrast to the latter method, parsimony did not recover the monophyly of Clitellata. However, a close scrutiny of the data suggested a spurious attraction between some polychaetes and clitellates. As a rule, molecular trees are closely aligned with morphology-based phylogenies. Acanthobdellida and Euhirudinea were reconciled in their traditional Hirudinea clade and were included in the Oligochaeta with the Branchiobdellida via the Lumbriculidae as a possible link between the two assemblages. While the 18S gene yielded a meaningful historical signal for determining relationships within clitellates, the exact position of Hirudinea and Branchiobdellida within oligochaetes remained unresolved. The lack of phylogenetic signal is interpreted as evidence for a rapid radiation of these taxa. The placement of Clitellata within the Polychaeta remained unresolved. The biological reality of polytomies within annelids is suggested and supports the hypothesis of an extremely ancient radiation of polychaetes and emergence of clitellates.     

On the ontogeny of the haptor and the evolution of the Monogenea

Data on the ontogeny of the posterior haptor of monogeneans were obtained from more than 150 publications and summarised. These data were plotted into diagrams showing evolutionary capacity levels based on the theory of a progressive evolution of marginal hooks, anchors and other attachment components of the posterior haptor in the Monogenea (Malmberg, 1986). 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks are assumed to be the most primitive monogenean haptoral condition. Thus the diagrams were founded on a 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hook evolutionary capacity level, and the evolutionary capacity levels of anchors and other haptoral attachement components were arranged according to haptoral ontogenetical sequences. In the final plotting diagram data on hosts, type of spermatozoa, oncomiracidial ciliation, sensilla pattern and protonephridial systems were also included. In this way a number of correlations were revealed. Thus, for example, the number of 5 + 5 marginal hooks correlates with the most primitive monogenean type of spermatozoon and with few sensillae, many ciliated cells and a simple protonephridial system in the oncomiracidium. On the basis of the reviewed data it is concluded that the ancient monogeneans with 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks were divided into two main lines, one retaining unhinged marginal hooks and the other evolving hinged marginal hooks. Both main lines have recent representatives at different marginal hook evolutionary capacity levels, i.e. monogeneans retaining a haptor with only marginal hooks. For the main line with hinged marginal hooks the name Articulon-choinea n. subclass is proposed. Members with 8 + 8 hinged marginal hooks only are here called Proanchorea n. superord. Monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks only are here called Ananchorea n. superord. and three new families are erected for its recent members: Anonchohapteridae n. fam., Acolpentronidae n. fam. and Anacanthoridae n. fam. (with 7 + 7, 8 + 8 and 9 + 9 unhinged marginal hooks, respectively). Except for the families of Articulonchoinea (e.g. Acanthocotylidae, Gyrodactylidae, Tetraonchoididae) Bychowsky's (1957) division of the Monogenea into the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea fits the proposed scheme, i.e. monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks form one old group, the Oligonchoinea, which have 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks, and the other group form the Polyonchoinea, which (with the exception of the Hexabothriidae) has a greater number (7 + 7, 8 + 8 or 9 + 9) of unhinged marginal hooks. It is proposed that both these names, Oligonchoinea (sensu mihi) and Polyonchoinea (sensu mihi), will be retained on one side and Articulonchoinea placed on the other side, which reflects the early monogenean evolution. Except for the members of Ananchorea [Polyonchoinea], all members of the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea have anchors, which imply that they are further evolved, i.e. have passed the 5 + 5 marginal hook evolutionary capacity level (Malmberg, 1986). There are two main types of anchors in the Monogenea: haptoral anchors, with anlages appearing in the haptor, and peduncular anchors, with anlages in the peduncle. There are two types of haptoral anchors: peripheral haptoral anchors, ontogenetically the oldest, and central haptoral anchors. Peduncular anchors, in turn, are ontogenetically younger than peripheral haptoral anchors. There may be two pairs of peduncular anchors: medial peduncular anchors, ontogentically the oldest, and lateral peduncular anchors. Only peduncular (not haptoral) anchors have anchor bars. Monogeneans with haptoral anchors are here called Mediohaptanchorea n. superord. and Laterohaptanchorea n. superord. or haptanchoreans. All oligonchoineans and the oldest polyonchoineans are haptanchoreans. Certain members of Calceostomatidae [Polyonchoinea] are the only monogeneans with both (peripheral) haptoral and peduncular anchors (one pair). These monogeneans are here called Mixanchorea n. superord. Polyonchoineans with peduncular anchors and unhinged marginal hooks are here called the Pedunculanchorea n. superord. The most primitive pedunculanchoreans have only one pair of peduncular anchors with an anchor bar, while the most advanced have both medial and lateral peduncular anchors; each pair having an anchor bar. Certain families of the Articulonchoinea, the Anchorea n. superord., also have peduncular anchors (parallel evolution): only one family, the Sundanonchidae n. fam., has both medial and lateral peduncular anchors, each anchor pair with an anchor bar. Evolutionary lines from different monogenean evolutionary capacity levels are discussed and a new system of classification for the Monogenea is proposed.In agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. EditorIn agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. Editor