Kingswood S C, Kumamoto A T, Charter S J, Houck M L, Benirschke K
Center for Reproduction of Endangered Species, Zoological Society of San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Cytogenet Cell Genet. 2000;91(1-4):128-33. doi: 10.1159/000056832.
G- and C-banded karyotypes of four species of the genus Kobus were compared using the standard karyotype of Bos taurus. Chromosomal complements were 2n = 50-54 in K. ellipsiprymnus, 2n = 50 in K. kob, 2n = 48 in K. leche, and 2n = 52 in K. megaceros. The number of autosomal arms in all karyotypes was 58. Fifteen autosomal pairs were conserved among these four species, including the 1;19 and 2;25 centric fusions, and autosomal differences involved eight centric fusion rearrangements. Five centric fusions were each unique to a particular taxon: 3;10 (K. leche), 3;11 and 6;29 (K. kob), and 5;17 and 7;11 (K. ellipsiprymnus). The 4;7 fusion occurred in K. leche and K. megaceros, whereas the 5;13 fusion occurred in K. kob and K. leche; the 6;18 fusion was found in three species but was absent in K. kob. Differences between the X chromosomes of the four Kobus species were attributed to heterochromatic additions or deletions, and Y-chromosome differences may have been the result of pericentric inversion. G-banded karyotypes of putative K. l. leche and K. l. kafuensis appeared identical, as did C-banded karyotypes of the two subspecies. Karyotypes of K. e. ellipsiprymnus and K. e. defassa differed as a result of the 6;18 centric fusion, which was polymorphic in K. e. defassa, and the 7;11 centric fusion, which was polymorphic in K. e. ellipsiprymnus but absent in K. e. defassa. Several centric fusions were related by monobrachial chain-IV complexes; however, records of hybridization indicate that reproductive isolation between at least certain species of Kobus is incomplete. Karyotypic differences between K. ellipsiprymnus (including K. e. ellipsiprymnus and K. e. defassa), K. kob, K. leche, and K. megaceros support the validity of these taxa, as well as the need to manage them as separate populations.
使用牛的标准核型对水羚属四种动物的G带和C带核型进行了比较。椭圆水羚的染色体数目为2n = 50 - 54,水羚为2n = 50,驴羚为2n = 48,巨角水羚为2n = 52。所有核型的常染色体臂数均为58。这四个物种共有15对常染色体,包括1;19和2;25着丝粒融合,常染色体差异涉及8种着丝粒融合重排。5种着丝粒融合分别是特定分类群所特有的:3;10(驴羚)、3;11和6;29(水羚)、5;17和7;11(椭圆水羚)。4;7融合发生在驴羚和巨角水羚中,而5;13融合发生在水羚和驴羚中;6;18融合在三个物种中出现,但水羚中没有。四种水羚属动物X染色体之间的差异归因于异染色质的增减,Y染色体的差异可能是臂间倒位的结果。推测的利氏水羚指名亚种和卡富埃水羚的G带核型看起来相同,两个亚种的C带核型也是如此。椭圆水羚指名亚种和德法萨水羚的核型不同,这是由于6;18着丝粒融合(在德法萨水羚中呈多态性)和7;11着丝粒融合(在椭圆水羚指名亚种中呈多态性,但在德法萨水羚中不存在)。几种着丝粒融合通过单臂链-IV复合体相关联;然而,杂交记录表明,至少某些水羚属物种之间的生殖隔离并不完全。椭圆水羚(包括椭圆水羚指名亚种和德法萨水羚)、水羚、驴羚和巨角水羚之间的核型差异支持了这些分类单元的有效性,以及将它们作为独立种群进行管理的必要性。