Cytogenetical and morphological features reveal significant differences among Venezuelan and Brazilian samples of Mugil curema (Teleostei: Mugilidae)
Karyotype of M. curema from the Gulf of Mexico and Brazil have been reported as possessing chromosome complement with 2n=28 and FN=48, whereas specimens from Venezuela has been reported as possessing a diploid number 2n=24 and a conserved FN (48). Although at first sight this variation suggests the...
Main Authors: | , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Sociedade Brasileira de Ictiologia
|
Series: | Neotropical Ichthyology |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1679-62252005000100006&lng=en&tlng=en |
id |
doaj-939ff4a8a8ab456eaf815c53b8eafaca |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-939ff4a8a8ab456eaf815c53b8eafaca2020-11-24T21:02:51ZengSociedade Brasileira de IctiologiaNeotropical Ichthyology1982-02243110711010.1590/S1679-62252005000100006S1679-62252005000100006Cytogenetical and morphological features reveal significant differences among Venezuelan and Brazilian samples of Mugil curema (Teleostei: Mugilidae)Mauro Nirchio0Roger Cipriano1Margarete Cestari2Alberto Fenocchio3Universidad de OrienteUniversidade Federal do ParanáUniversidade Federal do ParanáUniversidad Nacional de MisionesKaryotype of M. curema from the Gulf of Mexico and Brazil have been reported as possessing chromosome complement with 2n=28 and FN=48, whereas specimens from Venezuela has been reported as possessing a diploid number 2n=24 and a conserved FN (48). Although at first sight this variation suggests the presence of a chromosomal intraspecific (interpopulational) variability, the possibility that we are dealing with two different species was examined. This work revisit the karyotypes of M. curema from Venezuela and Brazil, including new data on C-banding, and NOR localization, and compares morphologic characteristics of samples from both localities. Thus, besides diploid number, the constitutive heterochromatin distribution and NORs location, mark other differences between M. curema Cytotype 1 (2n=28; FN=48) and Cytotype 2 (2n=24; NF=48). Moreover, morphologic comparison revealed differences in the scale counts and pectoral fin rays: 35 scales in the middle body line and 15 pectoral fin rays in specimens possessing the karyotype 2n=28, compared with 37-39 scales in the middle body line and 17 pectoral fin rays in specimens with the karyotype 2n=24. These differences lead us to suggest that both cytotypes are not related merely to geographic polytipic variations but could correspond to different species.http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1679-62252005000100006&lng=en&tlng=enkaryotypeC-bandNOR-bandingmeristic and morphometric featuresspecies identification |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Mauro Nirchio Roger Cipriano Margarete Cestari Alberto Fenocchio |
spellingShingle |
Mauro Nirchio Roger Cipriano Margarete Cestari Alberto Fenocchio Cytogenetical and morphological features reveal significant differences among Venezuelan and Brazilian samples of Mugil curema (Teleostei: Mugilidae) Neotropical Ichthyology karyotype C-band NOR-banding meristic and morphometric features species identification |
author_facet |
Mauro Nirchio Roger Cipriano Margarete Cestari Alberto Fenocchio |
author_sort |
Mauro Nirchio |
title |
Cytogenetical and morphological features reveal significant differences among Venezuelan and Brazilian samples of Mugil curema (Teleostei: Mugilidae) |
title_short |
Cytogenetical and morphological features reveal significant differences among Venezuelan and Brazilian samples of Mugil curema (Teleostei: Mugilidae) |
title_full |
Cytogenetical and morphological features reveal significant differences among Venezuelan and Brazilian samples of Mugil curema (Teleostei: Mugilidae) |
title_fullStr |
Cytogenetical and morphological features reveal significant differences among Venezuelan and Brazilian samples of Mugil curema (Teleostei: Mugilidae) |
title_full_unstemmed |
Cytogenetical and morphological features reveal significant differences among Venezuelan and Brazilian samples of Mugil curema (Teleostei: Mugilidae) |
title_sort |
cytogenetical and morphological features reveal significant differences among venezuelan and brazilian samples of mugil curema (teleostei: mugilidae) |
publisher |
Sociedade Brasileira de Ictiologia |
series |
Neotropical Ichthyology |
issn |
1982-0224 |
description |
Karyotype of M. curema from the Gulf of Mexico and Brazil have been reported as possessing chromosome complement with 2n=28 and FN=48, whereas specimens from Venezuela has been reported as possessing a diploid number 2n=24 and a conserved FN (48). Although at first sight this variation suggests the presence of a chromosomal intraspecific (interpopulational) variability, the possibility that we are dealing with two different species was examined. This work revisit the karyotypes of M. curema from Venezuela and Brazil, including new data on C-banding, and NOR localization, and compares morphologic characteristics of samples from both localities. Thus, besides diploid number, the constitutive heterochromatin distribution and NORs location, mark other differences between M. curema Cytotype 1 (2n=28; FN=48) and Cytotype 2 (2n=24; NF=48). Moreover, morphologic comparison revealed differences in the scale counts and pectoral fin rays: 35 scales in the middle body line and 15 pectoral fin rays in specimens possessing the karyotype 2n=28, compared with 37-39 scales in the middle body line and 17 pectoral fin rays in specimens with the karyotype 2n=24. These differences lead us to suggest that both cytotypes are not related merely to geographic polytipic variations but could correspond to different species. |
topic |
karyotype C-band NOR-banding meristic and morphometric features species identification |
url |
http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1679-62252005000100006&lng=en&tlng=en |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT mauronirchio cytogeneticalandmorphologicalfeaturesrevealsignificantdifferencesamongvenezuelanandbraziliansamplesofmugilcuremateleosteimugilidae AT rogercipriano cytogeneticalandmorphologicalfeaturesrevealsignificantdifferencesamongvenezuelanandbraziliansamplesofmugilcuremateleosteimugilidae AT margaretecestari cytogeneticalandmorphologicalfeaturesrevealsignificantdifferencesamongvenezuelanandbraziliansamplesofmugilcuremateleosteimugilidae AT albertofenocchio cytogeneticalandmorphologicalfeaturesrevealsignificantdifferencesamongvenezuelanandbraziliansamplesofmugilcuremateleosteimugilidae |
_version_ |
1716775141795430400 |