植物减数分裂染色体配对与染色体组分析的研究进展

简要介绍了植物减数分裂染色体配对研究.综述了减数分裂染色体配对研究在鉴定异源易位系、确定多倍体物种类型、分析物种间亲缘关系和物种的染色体组来源及探讨杂种不育的细胞遗传学机制等诸多方面的应用进展.分析了影响染色体配对的主要因素,如配对控制体系、遗传背景和外界环境条件等,并展望了染色体配对研究与其他技术结合在染色体组分析中的应用前景.     

雄性东亚钳蝎减数分裂和染色体组型

本文作者对我国药用动物东亚钳蝎——Buthusmartensi的精母细胞减数分裂和染色体组型进行初步观察。该虫的减数分裂有细线期、偶线期、粗线期、双线期和终变期。染色体数目24者居多,2n=24,即2n=22A+xy。染色体组型有3对为中部着丝粒染色体,7对亚中部着丝粒和1对端部着丝粒染色体。1对性染色体xy均为亚中部着丝粒染色体。     

卵巢发育阻滞的人工三倍体鱼减数分裂染色体配对的光镜观察

采用界面铺张制片和硝酸银一步染色的方法,对人工三倍体水晶彩鲫卵巢发育阻滞型个体的减数分裂染色体配对进行了光镜观察。在分化有初级卵母细胞的卵巢发育阻滞型的三倍体鱼中,减数分裂粗线期细胞主要的由二价体和单价体组成,也见有少量三价体和其它多价体,其染色体成员数大多在９０左右;在不同细胞间,染色体的大小变化较大;配对联会过程中形成的配对叉和产生的特异蛋白在一些细胞中明显可见。文中讨论了三倍体染色体配对紊乱     

中国雄鸡减数分裂SC组型和有丝分裂染色体组型的比较研究

以微铺展一硝酸银染色技术制备中国准鸡sc标本。电镜的定量SC组型分析表明：中国难鸡的so 组型和有丝分裂染色体组型有良好的一致性。并对个别SC与其相应的有丝分裂染色休在长度、形态士 的差异以及sc组型分析在鸟类细胞遗传学研究中的可能意义进行了讨论。     

美味猕猴桃原生质体再生植株细胞遗传学研究 Ⅲ .母株减数分裂前期Ⅰ染色体配对的光镜观察

首次报道在光镜下观察美味猕猴桃 (品种 :No.2 6原生质体植株的母株 )花粉母细胞( PMC)染色体在减数分裂前期的配对 ,发现其配对和凝缩有明显不同步性。不同细胞间染色体配对形式变化较大 ,一般以二价联会为主 ,其次由其它多种配对方式 (包括有复合配对、重复配对、着丝点或端粒处联合和多价联会 )形成多价体 ,还有少数未配对或发生内配对 (偶见 )的单价体和几条二价体之间的次级配对。粗线期观察到少数染色体有缺失 (或重复 )、倒位、易位和疏松配对等结构性改变。表明该植株是一个复杂的区段异源六位体 ,少数染色体在结构上累积有变异。还认为该植株是研究减数分裂染色体配对和联会机制的好材料。     

美味猕猴桃原生质体再生植株细胞遗传学研究 Ⅲ.母株减数分裂前期Ⅰ染色体配对的光镜观察

首次报道在光镜下观察美味猕猴桃（品种：Ｎｏ．２６原生质体植株的母株）花粉母细胞（ＰＭＣ）染色体在减数分裂前期的配对,发现其配对和凝缩有明显不同步性。不同细胞间染色体配对形式变化较大,一般以二价联合为主,其次由其它多种配对方式（包括有复合配对,重复配对,着丝点或端粒处联合和多价联会）形成多价体,还有少数未配对或发生内配对（偶见）的单价体和几条二阶体之间的次级配对,粗线期观察到少数染色体有缺失（或重复     

长鬣蜥的染色体组型和减数分裂联会复合体的研究

本文报道长鬣蜥(Physignathus cocincinus)有丝分裂染色体及C-,Ag-带以及减数分裂联会复合体核型。染色体数2n=36,NF=48,核型组成为12V+24m(V为双臂大染色体,其中No.2为亚中着丝粒染色体,m为微小染色体)。结构异染色质主要分布在小染色体上。一对Ag-NORs分布于第2对亚中着丝粒染色体末端。     

phlb基因诱导小麦ABD染色体组部分同源染色体配对的研究

通过花药培养首次获得了“中国春”phlb突变体单倍体,同时也获得了“中国春”单倍体。对其细胞学观察表明,前者花粉母细胞减数分裂中期Ⅰ每个细胞染色体交叉为5.08个,后者为1.30个。证明了phlb基因在单倍体状态下具有强的诱导ABD染色体组部分同源染色体间的配对作用。     

减数分裂中染色体不分离与染色体病

人类细胞减数分裂是精卵形成过程中的重要阶段。它包括染色体的一次复制 ,细胞的两次连续的分裂以及同源染色体配对、交换 ,同源染色体分离 ,姐妹染色单体分离等一系列复杂的过程。在细胞分裂进入中、后期时 ,如果其一对同源染色体或两姐妹染色单体未分别向两极移动 ,却同时进入一个子细胞中 ,结果细胞分裂所形成的两个子细胞中 ,一个将因染色体数目增多而形成超二倍体 ,一个则由于染色体数目减少而形成亚二倍体。这一过程称染色体不分离 (ｃｈｒｏｍｏｓｏｍａｌｎｏｎ -ｄｉｓｊｕｎｃｔｉｏｎ) ,从而引起配子中染色体数目异常 ,产生非整…     

中国雉鸡减数分裂SC组型和有丝分裂染色体组型的比较研究

以微铺展-硝酸银染色技术制备中国雉鸡SC标本。电镜的定量SC组型分析表明:中国雉鸡的SG组型和有丝分裂染色体组型有良好的一致性。并对个别SC与其相应的有丝分裂染色体在长度、形态上的差异以及SC组型分析在鸟类细胞遗传学研究中的可能意义进行了讨论。     

Meiotic Chromosome Pairing in Triploid and Tetraploid Saccharomyces Cerevisiae

Meiotic chromosome pairing in isogenic triploid and tetraploid strains of yeast and the consequences of polyploidy on meiotic chromosome segregation are studied. Synaptonemal complex formation at pachytene was found to be different in the triploid and in the tetraploid. In the triploid, triple-synapsis, that is, the connection of three homologues at a given site, is common. It can even extend all the way along the chromosomes. In the tetraploid, homologous chromosomes mostly come in pairs of synapsed bivalents. Multiple synapsis, that is, synapsis of more than two homologues in one and the same region, was virtually absent in the tetraploid. About five quadrivalents per cell occurred due to the switching of pairing partners. From the frequency of pairing partner switches it can be deduced that in most chromosomes synapsis is initiated primarily at one end, occasionally at both ends and rarely at an additional intercalary position. In contrast to a considerably reduced spore viability (~40%) in the triploid, spore viability is only mildly affected in the tetraploid. The good spore viability is presumably due to the low frequency of quadrivalents and to the highly regular 2:2 segregation of the few quadrivalents that do occur. Occasionally, however, quadrivalents appear to be subject to 3:1 nondisjunction that leads to spore death in the second generation.     

Potential Roles for Centromere Pairing in Meiotic Chromosome Segregation

One of the key differences between mitosis and meiosis is the necessity for exchange between homologous chromosomes. Crossing-over between homologous chromosomes is essential for proper meiotic chromosome segregation in most organisms, serving the purpose of linking chromosomes to their homologous partners until they segregate from one another at anaphase I. In several organisms it has been shown that occasional pairs of chromosomes that have failed to experience exchange segregate with reduced fidelity compared to exchange chromosomes, but do not segregate randomly. Such observations support the notion that there are mechanisms, beyond exchange, that contribute to meiotic segregation fidelity. Recent findings indicate that active centromere pairing is important for proper kinetochore orientation and consequently, segregation of non-exchange chromosomes. Here we discuss the implications of these findings for the behavior of meiotic chromosomes.     

The Multiple Roles of Cohesin in Meiotic Chromosome Morphogenesis and Pairing

Sister chromatid cohesion, mediated by cohesin complexes, is laid down during DNA replication and is essential for the accurate segregation of chromosomes. Previous studies indicated that, in addition to their cohesion function, cohesins are essential for completion of recombination, pairing, meiotic chromosome axis formation, and assembly of the synaptonemal complex (SC). Using mutants in the cohesin subunit Rec8, in which phosphorylated residues were mutated to alanines, we show that cohesin phosphorylation is not only important for cohesin removal, but that cohesin's meiotic prophase functions are distinct from each other. We find pairing and SC formation to be dependent on Rec8, but independent of the presence of a sister chromatid and hence sister chromatid cohesion. We identified mutations in REC8 that differentially affect Rec8's cohesion, pairing, recombination, chromosome axis and SC assembly function. These findings define Rec8 as a key determinant of meiotic chromosome morphogenesis and a central player in multiple meiotic events.     

Two Types of Sites Required for Meiotic Chromosome Pairing in Caenorhabditis Elegans

Previous studies have shown that isolated portions of Caenorhabditis elegans chromosomes are not equally capable of meiotic exchange. These results led to the proposal that a homolog recognition region (HRR), defined as the region containing those sequences enabling homologous chromosomes to pair and recombine, is localized near one end of each chromosome. Using translocations and duplications we have localized the chromosome I HRR to the right end. Whereas the other half of chromosome I did not confer any ability for homologs to pair and recombine, deficiencies in this region dominantly suppressed recombination to the middle of the chromosome. These deletions may have disrupted pairing mechanisms that are secondary to and require an HRR. Thus, the processes of pairing and recombination appear to utilize at least two chromosomal elements, the HRR and other pairing sites. For example, terminal sequences from other chromosomes increase the ability of free duplications to recombine with their normal homologs, suggesting that telomere-associated sequences, homologous or nonhomologous, play a role in facilitating meiotic exchange. Recombination can also initiate at internal sites separated from the HRR by chromosome rearrangement, such as deletions of the unc-54 region of chromosome I. When crossing over was suppressed in a region of chromosome I, compensatory increases were observed in other regions. Thus, the presence of the HRR enabled recombination to occur but did not determine the distribution of the crossover events. It seems most likely that there are multiple initiation sites for recombination once homolog recognition has been achieved.     

Molecular Mechanisms of Homologous Chromosome Pairing and Segregation in Plants

In most eukaryotic species, three basic steps of pairing, recombination and synapsis occur during prophase of meiosis I. Homologous chromosomal pairing and recombination are essential for accurate segregation of chromosomes. In contrast to the well-studied processes such as recombination and synapsis, many aspects of chromosome pairing are still obscure. Recent progress in several species indicates that the telomere bouquet formation can facilitate homologous chromosome pairing by bringing chromosome ends into close proximity, but the sole presence of telomere clustering is not sufficient for recognizing homologous pairs. On the other hand, accurate segregation of the genetic material from parent to offspring during meiosis is dependent on the segregation of homologs in the reductional meiotic division （MI） with sister kinetochores exhibiting mono-orientation from the same pole, and the segregation of sister chromatids during the equational meiotic division （MII） with kinetochores showing bi-orientation from the two poles. The underlying mechanism of orientation and segregation is still unclear. Here we focus on recent studies in plants and other species that provide insight into how chromosomes find their partners and mechanisms mediating chromosomal segregation.     

X-4 Translocations and Meiotic Drive in Drosophila melanogaster Males: Role of Sex Chromosome Pairing

Males carrying certain X-4 translocations exhibit strongly skewed sperm recovery ratios. The X^P4^D half of the translocation disjoins regularly from the Y chromosome and the 4^PX^D half disjoins regularly from the normal 4. Yet the smaller member of each bivalent is recovered in excess of its pairing partner, apparently due to differential gametic lethality. Chromosome recovery probabilities are multiplicative; the viability of each genotype is the product of the recovery probability of its component chromosomes. Meiotic drive can also be caused by deficiency for X heterochromatin. In(1)sc^4Lsc^8R males show the same size dependent chromosome recoveries and multiplicative recovery probabilities found in T(1;4)B^S males. Meiotic drive in In(1)sc^4Lsc^8R males has been shown to be due to X-Y pairing failure. Although pairing is regular in the T(X;4) males, the striking phenotypic parallels suggest a common explanation. The experiments described below show that the two phenomena are, in fact, one and the same. X-4 translocations are shown to have the same effect on recovery of independently assorting chromosomes as does In(1)sc^4Lsc^8R. Addition of pairing sites to the 4^PX^D half of the translocation eliminates drive. A common explanation—failure of the distal euchromatic portion of the X chromosome to participate in X:Y meiotic pairing—is suggested as the cause for drive. The effect of X chromosome breakpoint on X-4 translocation induced meiotic drive is investigated. It is found that translocations with breakpoints distal to 13C on the salivary map do not cause drive while translocations broken proximal to 13C cause drive. The level of drive is related to the position of the breakpoint—the more proximal the breakpoint the greater the drive.     

Roles of Hop1 and Mek1 in Meiotic Chromosome Pairing and Recombination Partner Choice in Schizosaccharomyces pombe

Synaptonemal complex (SC) proteins Hop1 and Mek1 have been proposed to promote homologous recombination in meiosis of Saccharomyces cerevisiae by establishment of a barrier against sister chromatid recombination. Therefore, it is interesting to know whether the homologous proteins play a similar role in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Unequal sister chromatid recombination (USCR) was found to be increased in hop1 and mek1 single and double deletion mutants in assays for intrachromosomal recombination (ICR). Meiotic intergenic (crossover) and intragenic (conversion) recombination between homologous chromosomes was reduced. Double-strand break (DSB) levels were also lowered. Notably, deletion of hop1 restored DSB repair in rad50S meiosis. This may indicate altered DSB repair kinetics in hop1 and mek1 deletion strains. A hypothesis is advanced proposing transient inhibition of DSB processing by Hop1 and Mek1 and thus providing more time for repair by interaction with the homologous chromosome. Loss of Hop1 and Mek1 would then result in faster repair and more interaction with the sister chromatid. Thus, in S. pombe meiosis, where an excess of sister Holliday junction over homologous Holliday junction formation has been demonstrated, Hop1 and Mek1 possibly enhance homolog interactions to ensure wild-type level of crossover formation rather than inhibiting sister chromatid interactions.Sexual reproduction in eukaryotes involves formation of haploid gametes from diploid cells by one round of DNA replication, pairing of the homologous chromosomes, and recombination and then by the two meiotic divisions (53). In fungi the gametes differentiate into haploid spores, which germinate to form vegetative cells. Crossover (CO) formation between homologous chromosomes and DNA repair processes between sister chromatids are required for spore viability (10, 55, 58).In vegetative cells homologous recombination (HR) is important for repair of DNA damage and stalled replication forks, with the sister chromatid as the preferred partner (28). Many of the enzymes involved in mitotic HR also contribute to meiotic recombination. In addition, meiosis-specific cytological structures and enzymes enhance recombination frequency (meiotic induction) and shift partner preference from sister chromatids to homologous chromosomes (3, 47, 64, 74). In detail the steps of HR vary between different types of sequence organization (allelic versus sister versus ectopic), between different types of DNA damage, between meiotic and mitotic cells, and between species (10, 55, 58).Meiotic recombination, including CO formation, is initiated by DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs). In Saccharomyces cerevisiae and other eukaryotes, DSBs are formed by Spo11. Many cofactors are required (29). The Schizosaccharomyces pombe homolog is Rec12, also requiring auxiliary factors whose elimination leads to loss of meiotic DSB formation (12). The 5′ single-strand ends at DSBs are processed by nucleases. In S. cerevisiae the MRX complex made up by the proteins Rad50, Mre11, and Xrs2 is required for this resection, as well as for DSB formation. The corresponding MRN complex of S. pombe (Rad50, Rad32, and Nbs1) is not required for DSB formation but is essential for DSB repair (43, 72). Deletion of rad50, rad32, or ctp1 (homologous to SAE2/COM1 in S. cerevisiae and CtIP in humans) leads to very low spore viability. These proteins are also essential for DSB processing (23, 24, 32, 43, 60, 62).Free DNA 3′ ends at DSBs are recruited for invasion of a sister or homologous chromatid by the strand transfer proteins Rad51 and Dmc1, again involving many accessory proteins (16). This results in the central intermediates of HR: heteroduplex DNA consisting of single strands originating from different chromatids and Holliday junctions (HJs). In S. cerevisiae HJs form preferably between homologs with a two- to sixfold excess over intersister HJs (64). Surprisingly, meiotic HJs form with about a fourfold excess between sisters in S. pombe (11). Eventually the intermediates are resolved into crossover (CO) and noncrossover (NCO) events. COs show exchange of the flanking sequences of the two chromatids involved and usually carry a patch of conversion (unilateral transfer of DNA sequences from one chromatid to its interacting partner) near the DSB site. NCOs are conversion events without associated COs (22). In S. pombe loss of core HR functions leads to very low spore viability: deletion of rad51 but not of dmc1 (20), double mutation of rad54 and rdh54 (7), inactivation of the endonuclease activity encoded by mus81 and eme1 (5, 52), and combined deletion of rad22 and rti1 (homologs of RAD52 of S. cerevisiae). But, differently from the other core functions, Rad22 and Rti1 are not required for CO and NCO (50).Early in meiotic prophase of many eukaryotes, axial elements (called lateral elements in later stages) form along sister chromatids, and pairing of homologous chromosomes is initiated, leading to juxtaposition of the homologous chromosomes along their whole length in the synaptonemal complex (SC) (54). In S. pombe no SC is formed, but linear elements (LEs), resembling axial elements of other eukaryotes, are formed. LEs do not form continuously along the chromosomes (1) but load the proteins Rec10, Hop1, and Mek1 (36, 44, 57), which are homologs of, or at least related, to the S. cerevisiae proteins Red1, Hop1, and Mek1, respectively, localizing to axial/lateral elements (2, 67). Hop1 carries a HORMA domain, also present in proteins associating with axial elements and regulating the progress of recombination in higher eukaryotes: Arabidopsis thaliana (61), Caenorhabditis elegans (9, 41), and mammals (18).In S. cerevisiae localization of Hop1 and Mek1 (meiosis-specific protein kinase) to axial elements is dependent on Red1 (2, 67). Mutation of the three S. cerevisiae genes results in reduction of DSB formation, CO and conversion frequencies, and spore viability (26, 31, 59). Direct comparison of unequal sister chromatid recombination (USCR) frequencies in an assay excluding the scoring of intrachromatid recombination (ICR) revealed no increase in the hop1 null mutant but about fourfold increases in the red1 and mek1 null mutants (69). The S. cerevisiae Hop1, Red1, and Mek1 proteins are involved in biasing meiotic DSB repair to occur between homologous chromosomes rather than between sister chromatids (47). Activated Mek1 kinase is required for the inhibition of sister chromatid-mediated DSB repair by Rad51, when the DMC1 gene is deleted and the meiotic recombination checkpoint is activated (4, 27, 38, 47). For Mek1 activation, phosphorylation of Hop1 by the Mec1/Tel1 kinases is also required (6).Less is known about the S. pombe proteins. Hop1 of S. pombe was identified as a nonsignificant hit by sequence comparison with full-length S. cerevisiae Hop1 and contains an N-terminal HORMA domain and a central zinc finger motif like Hop1 in S. cerevisiae. In addition they share a short homology block toward the C terminus (36). The Mek1 protein of S. pombe shares 34% identity and 54% similarity with its S. cerevisiae counterpart along the whole sequence. It contains an FHA domain in the N-terminal part like the other members of its family of checkpoint kinases and is involved in regulation of the meiotic cell cycle (57). Hop1 and Mek1 are strongly expressed in meiosis but not expressed or only slightly expressed in vegetative cells (42, 57). In prophase both proteins localize to LEs as defined by colocalization with the LE component Rec10 (36). Deletion of the distant RED1 homolog rec10 abolishes LE formation (36, 44) and strongly reduces meiotic recombination (17, 70). Rec10, but not Hop1 and Mek1, is required for localization of Rec7 (a distant homolog of S. cerevisiae Rec114) to meiotic chromosomes (34). Rec7 and Rec10 are required for Rec12 activity (12, 29).Obtaining information on the functions of Hop1 and Mek1 in S. pombe was the aim of the work presented here, especially on their possible roles in homolog versus sister discrimination for DSB repair. Deletion mutants have been studied with respect to spore viability and the frequencies of CO and conversion. They have also been assessed for genetic recombination events between sister chromatids in the known PS1 assay (63) and the newly developed VL1 assay (for details, see Fig. ​Fig.3).3). Physical analysis of DSB formation and repair has been performed in meiotic time course experiments. It is proposed that S. pombe Hop1 and Mek1 are promoting interactions between homologous chromosomes rather than inhibiting interactions between sister chromatids.Open in a separate windowFIG. 3.PS1 and VL1 assay systems for intrachromosomal recombination. Strains with constructs carrying repeated DNA sequences have been assayed for prototroph formation either by intrachromatid recombination (ICR, yielding prototrophs only in PS1) or by unequal sister chromatid recombination (USCR, in PS1 and VL1). Crosses of the constructs were performed with strains carrying a deletion of the ade6 gene to exclude other homologous recombination events. (A) The PS1 assay involves copies of the ade6 gene inactivated by either the hot spot mutation M26 or the mutation 469. The repeated sequences are separated by the ura4⁺ marker (63). ICR (left) or USCR (right) between the repeated sequences can lead to formation of adenine prototrophs that have lost the ura4⁺ marker by crossover (CO) or single-strand annealing (SSA) events. Adenine prototrophs maintaining the ura4⁺ marker can derive from noncrossover (NCO) events. Both types of pairing may lead to CO or NCO products. (B) The newly constructed VL1 assay (see the supplemental material) involves different truncations of the ade6 gene separated by the hyg^R marker (also called hphMX6), conferring hygromycin resistance. The left truncation carries a 3′ portion of ade6; the right truncation carries a 5′ portion of ade6. While the gray parts of the truncations are not overlapping, the white sections of 500-bp length are of almost identical sequence, allowing for homologous pairing. CO and SSA products resulting from ICR retain only the central portion of ade6 and remain auxotrophic. Adenine prototrophic CO and NCO products resulting from USCR both retain hygromycin resistance. Note that NCO events may arise through loop formation of one sister chromatid and pairing with a single block (500 bp) of the repeated ade6 sequence (39).     

应用荧光原位杂交和染色体配对研究八倍体小冰麦中2的染色体组构成及染色体特征

通过染色体配对分析和荧光原位杂交（ＦＩＳＨ）技术对八倍体小冰麦中２的染色体组构成进行分析,结果表明：八倍体小冰麦中２含有的冰草染色体是来自天蓝冰草（Ａｇｒｏｐｙｒｏｎ　ｉｎｔｅｒｍｅｄｉｕｍ（Ｈｏｓｔ）Ｐ．Ｂ．＝Ｅｌｙｔｒｉｇｉａ　ｉｎｔｅｒｍｅｄｉａ（Ｈｏｓｔ）Ｎｅｖｓｋｉ＝Ｔｈｉｎｏｐｙｒｕｍ　ｉｎｔｅｒｍｅｄｉｕｍ　（Ｈｏｓｔ）Ｂａｒｋｗｏｒｔｈ　ａｎｄ　Ｄｅｗｅｙ）具同亲关系的染色体组,但冰草的这种同亲关系的染色体组不同于二倍体长穗偃麦草（Ｔｈｉｎｏｐｙｒｕｍ　ｅｌｏｕｇａｔｕｍ　２Ｘ）的Ｅ组染色体。中２含有１２条冰草染色体,且有一对染色体为小麦（Ｔｒｉｔｉｃｕｍ　ａｅｓｔｉｖｕｍ　Ｌ．）染色体和冰草染色体之间易位所形成的。