DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

국내 토종개의 염색체 조사에 관한 연구

Study on chromosomes survey of Korea native dogs

  • 박창은 (남서울대학교 임상병리학과)
  • Park, Chang-Eun (Department of Biomedical Laboratory Science, Namseoul University)
  • 투고 : 2011.05.27
  • 심사 : 2011.09.10
  • 발행 : 2011.09.30

초록

The karyotype of the domestic dog is widely accepted as one of the difficult mammalian karyotypes to work. In contrast to many other animals, knowledge about the canine karyotype is quite sparse. The dog has a total of 78 chromosomes; all 76 autosomes are acrocentric in morphology and show only a gradual decrease in length. But appear to be quite small and difficult to identify unambiguously. To purchased standardization of chromosome in Korea native dog, there were analyzed by conventional trypsin/Giemsa staining (GTG-banding techniques), and were compared with 4, 6, 8, 11, 13, 17 chromosome. There were no variations in karyotypes which were analyzed by conventional GTG-banding techniques, but differences were observed in G-banding patterns with Sapsaree, Jindo, Gyeongju DongGyeong dogs, Welshi-Corgi. It is not clear that these disagreements in G-banding patterns between strains of dog were caused by chromosome polymorphism or a difference in interpretation. Comparative analysis of the distribution patterns of conserved segments defined by dog paints in the genomes of the Korea native dogs demonstrates that their differences in the karyotypes of these three species could have resulted from acrocentric banding patterns.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. 최석규, 성기창, 이은우, 박창은. 2010. GTG banding에 의한 경주지방의 무미 또는 단미 형태의 개(경주개 동경이)의 핵형분석. 한국가축위생학회지 33: 207-211.
  2. 탁연빈, 하지홍, 김종봉, 박희천. 1993. 고유견 삽사리의 보호 육성에 관한 연구. 한국과학재단 목적기초연구 제 2 차년도 중간보고서(KOSEF90-05-00-11).
  3. Breen M, Hitte C, Lorentzen TD, Thomas R, Cadieu E, Sabacan L, Scott A, Evanno G, Parker HG, Kirkness EF, Hudson R, Guyon R, Mahairas GG, Gelfenbeyn B, Fraser CM, Andre C, Galibert F, Ostrander EA. 2004. An integrated 4249 marker FISH/RH map of the canine genome. BMC Genomics 5: 65. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-5-65
  4. Dev VG, Miller DA, Miller OJ. 1973. Chromosome markers in Mus musculus: strain differences in C-banding. Genetics 75: 663-670.
  5. Fischer PE, Holmes NG, Dickens HF, Thomas R, Binns MM, Nacheva EP. 1996. The application of FISH techniques for physical mapping in the dog (Canis familiaris). Mamm Genome 7: 37-41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s003359900009
  6. Graphodatsky AS, Beklemisheva VR, Dolf G. 1995. High-resolution GTG-banding patterns of dog and silver fox chromosomes: description and comparative analysis. Cytogenet Cell Genet 69: 226-231. https://doi.org/10.1159/000133970
  7. Gustavsson I. 1964. The chromosomes of the dog. Hereditas 51: 187-189.
  8. Kim JB, Ok HS. 1996. G-banded karyotype of Korean Jindo dog (Canis familiaris). Korean J Genetics 8: 183-188.
  9. Kirkness EF, Bafna V, Halpern AL, Levy S, Remington K, Rusch DB, Delcher AL, Pop M, Wang W, Fraser CM, Venter JC. 2003. The dog genome: survey sequencing and comparative analysis. Science 301 (5641): 1898-1903. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1086432
  10. Langford CF, Fischer PE, Binns MM, Holmes NG, Carter NP. 1996. Chromosome-specific paints from a high-resolution flow karyotype of the dog. Chromosome Res 4: 115-123. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02259704
  11. Manolache M, Rose WM, Schmid M. 1976. Banding analysis of the somatic chromosomes of the domestic dog (Canis familiaris). Can J Genet Cytol 18: 513-518. https://doi.org/10.1139/g76-063
  12. Mitelman F. 1995. ISCN 1995: An international system for human cytogenetic nomenclature (1995): recommendations of the International Standing Committee on Human Cytogenetic Nomenclature, Memphis, Tennessee, USA, October 9-13, 1994. S. Karger Publishers, Inc. Switzerland.
  13. Pienkowska-Schelling A, Schelling C, Zawada M, Yang F, Bugno M, Ferguson-Smith M. 2008. Cytogenetic studies and karyotype nomenclature of three wild canid species: maned wolf (Chrysocyon brachyurus), bat-eared fox (Otocyon megalotis) and fennec fox (Fennecus zerda). Cytogenet Genome Res 121: 25-34. https://doi.org/10.1159/000124378
  14. Poulsen BS, Shibasaki Y, Ikeuchi T, Ronne M. 1990. Banding studies in Canis familiaris. I. Replication patterns in karyotypes from lymphocyte cultures. Cytobios 62: 161-165.
  15. Reimann N, Bartnitzke S, Bullerdiek J, Schmitz U, Rogalla P, Nolte I, Ronne M. 1996. An extended nomenclature of the canine karyotype. Cytogenet Cell Genet. 73: 140-144. https://doi.org/10.1159/000134326
  16. Reimann N, Bartnitzke S, Nolte I, Bullerdiek J. 1999. Working with canine chromosomes: current recommendations for karyotype description. J Hered 90: 31-34. https://doi.org/10.1093/jhered/90.1.31
  17. Ronne M 1989. Chromosome preparation and high resolution banding techniques. A review. J Dairy Sci 72: 1363-1377. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(89)79243-2
  18. Ronne M, Kirpekar F, Shibasaki Y, Poulsen BS, Kristiansen K. 1990. R-banding and in situ hybridization localization of single copy genes on high resolution banded chromosomes. Anticancer Res. 10(2A): 375-377.
  19. Seabright M. 1971. A rapid banding technique for human chromosomes. Lancet 2 (7731): 971-972.
  20. Stone DM, Jacky PB, Prieur DJ. 1991. The Giemsa banding pattern of canine chromosomes, using a cell synchronization technique. Genome 34: 407-412. https://doi.org/10.1139/g91-062
  21. Switonski M, Reimann N, Bosma AA, Long S, Bartnitzke S, Pienkowska A, Moreno-Milan MM, Fischer P. 1996. Report on the progress of standardization of the G-banded canine (Canis familiaris) karyotype. Committee for the standardized Karyotype of the dog (Canis familiaris). Chromosome Res 4: 306-309. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02263682
  22. Vignaux F, Hitte C, Priat C, Chuat JC, Andre C, Galibert F. 1999. Construction and optimization of a dog whole-genome radiation hybrid panel. Mamm Genome 10: 888-894. https://doi.org/10.1007/s003359901109