Cytogenetics of entelegyne spiders (Arachnida, Araneae) from southern Africa.
Araneoidea
Gnaphosoidea
Oecobioidea
Karyotype
NOR
RTA clade
acrocentric
meiosis
rDNA FISH
sex chromosomes
Journal
Comparative cytogenetics
ISSN: 1993-0771
Titre abrégé: Comp Cytogenet
Pays: Bulgaria
ID NLM: 101503807
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
21
11
2019
accepted:
17
01
2020
entrez:
21
3
2020
pubmed:
21
3
2020
medline:
21
3
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Spiders represent one of the most studied arachnid orders. They are particularly intriguing from a cytogenetic point of view, due to their complex and dynamic sex chromosome determination systems. Despite intensive research on this group, cytogenetic data from African spiders are still mostly lacking. In this study, we describe the karyotypes of 38 species of spiders belonging to 16 entelegyne families from South Africa and Namibia. In the majority of analysed families, the observed chromosome numbers and morphology (mainly acrocentric) did not deviate from the family-level cytogenetic characteristics based on material from other continents: Tetragnathidae (2n♂ = 24), Ctenidae and Oxyopidae (2n♂ = 28), Sparassidae (2n♂ = 42), Gnaphosidae, Trachelidae and Trochanteriidae (2n♂ = 22), and Salticidae (2n♂ = 28). On the other hand, we identified interspecific variability within Hersiliidae (2n♂ = 33 and 35), Oecobiidae (2n♂ = 19 and 25), Selenopidae (2n♂ = 26 and 29) and Theridiidae (2n♂ = 21 and 22). We examined the karyotypes of Ammoxenidae and Gallieniellidae for the first time. Their diploid counts (2n♂ = 22) correspond to the superfamily Gnaphosoidea and support their placement in this lineage. On the other hand, the karyotypes of Prodidominae (2n♂ = 28 and 29) contrast with all other Gnaphosoidea. Similarly, the unusually high diploid number in
Identifiants
pubmed: 32194919
doi: 10.3897/CompCytogen.v14i1.48667
pii: 48667
pmc: PMC7066264
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
107-138Informations de copyright
František Šťáhlavský, Martin Forman, Pavel Just, Filip Denič, Charles R. Haddad, Vera Opatova.
Références
J Evol Biol. 2007 Nov;20(6):2427-39
pubmed: 17908166
Chromosome Res. 2005;13(2):145-56
pubmed: 15861304
Curr Biol. 2014 Aug 4;24(15):1765-71
pubmed: 25042592
Comp Cytogenet. 2018 Feb 13;12(1):41-59
pubmed: 29675136
Cytogenet Genome Res. 2013;141(1):43-9
pubmed: 23711575
PLoS One. 2010 Sep 21;5(9):e12804
pubmed: 20877726
Evolution. 2013 Aug;67(8):2258-72
pubmed: 23888849
Comp Cytogenet. 2014 May 16;8(2):93-101
pubmed: 25147622
Chromosoma. 1976 Nov 19;58(3):275-84
pubmed: 1001157
Genet Mol Biol. 2010 Oct;33(4):663-8
pubmed: 21637575
Sci Rep. 2019 Feb 28;9(1):3001
pubmed: 30816146
Cytogenet Genome Res. 2011;133(1):43-66
pubmed: 21282941
Cytogenet Genome Res. 2012;137(1):22-30
pubmed: 22796655
Cytogenet Genome Res. 2016;148(2-3):227-36
pubmed: 27245985
Hereditas. 2004;140(1):49-60
pubmed: 15032947
Comp Cytogenet. 2017 Sep 14;11(4):627-639
pubmed: 29114358
Trends Genet. 2011 Jun;27(6):207-16
pubmed: 21592609
Genet Mol Res. 2011 May 03;10(2):752-63
pubmed: 21563069
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2010 Jun;55(3):786-804
pubmed: 20206276
Zoolog Sci. 2014 Feb;31(2):83-8
pubmed: 24521317
Curr Biol. 2018 May 7;28(9):1489-1497.e5
pubmed: 29706520
PeerJ. 2016 Feb 23;4:e1719
pubmed: 26925338
Chromosome Res. 2006;14(8):859-80
pubmed: 17195053