The Ursidae family includes eight species, the karyotype of which diverges somewhat, in both chromosome number and morphology, from that of other families in the order Carnivora. The combination of consensus molecular phylogeny and high-resolution trypsin G-banded karyotype analysis has suggested that ancestral chromosomal fissions and at least two fusion events are associated with the development of the different ursid species. Here, we revisit this hypothesis by hybridizing reciprocal chromosome painting probes derived from the giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca), domestic cat (Felis catus), and man (Homo sapiens) to representative bear species karyotypes. Comparative analysis of the different chromosome segment homologies allowed reconstruction of the genomic composition of a putative ancestral bear karyotype based upon the recognition of 39 chromosome segments defined by painting as the s mallest c onserved e volutionary u nit s egments (pSCEUS) among these species. The different pSCEUS combinations occurring among modern bear species support and extend the postulated sequence of chromosomal rearrangements and provide a framework to propose patterns of genome reorganization among carnivores and other mammal radiations.

1.
Baker RJ, Qumsiyeh MB, Hood CS: Role of chromosomal banding patterns in understanding mammalian evolution, in Genoways HH (ed): Current Mammalogy, Vol 1 (Plenum Press, New York 1987).
2.
Chowdhary BP, Frönicke L, Gustavsson I, Scherthan H: Comparative analysis of the cattle and human genomes: detection of ZOO-FISH and gene mapping based chromosomal homologies. Mammal Genome 7:297–302 (1996).
3.
Collins C, Kuo WL, Segraves R, Pinkel D, Fuscoe J, Gray JW: Construction and characterization of plasmid libraries enriched in sequences from single human chromosomes. Genomics 11:997–1006 (1991).
4.
Dutrillaux B, Couturier J: The ancestral karyotype of Carnivora: comparison with that of platyrrhine monkeys. Cytogenet Cell Genet 35:200–208 (1983).
5.
Frönicke L, Chowdhary BP, Scherthan H, Gustavsson I: A comparative map of the porcine and human genomes demonstrates ZOO-FISH and gene mapping-based chromosomal homologies. Mammal Genome 7:285–290 (1996).
6.
Goureau A, Yerle M, Schmitz A, Riquet J, Milan D, Pinton P, Gellin J: Human and porcine correspondence of chromosome segments using bidirectional chromosome painting. Genomics 36:252–262 (1996).
7.
Hameister H, Klett CH, Bruch J, Dixkens CH, Vogel W, Christensen K: ZOO-FISH analysis: the American mink (Mustela vison) closely resembles the cat karyotype. Chrom Res 5:5–11 (1997).
8.
Hayes H: Chromosome painting with human chromosome specific paints reveals the extent and distribution of conserved segments in bovine chromosomes. Cytogenet Cell Genet 71:168–174 (1995).
9.
Jauch A, Wienberg J, Stanyon R, Arnold N, Tofanelli S, Ishida T, Cremer T: Reconstruction of genomic rearrangements in great apes and gibbons by chromosome painting. Proc natl Acad Sci, USA 89:8611–8615 (1992).
10.
Modi WS, Nash WG, Ferrari AC, O’Brien SJ: Cytogenetic methodologies for gene mapping and comparative analyses in mammalian cell culture systems. Gene Anal tech Appl 4:75–85 (1987).
11.
Müller S, O’Brien PCM, Ferguson-Smith MA, Wienberg J: Reciprocal chromosome painting between human and prosimians (Eulemur macaco macaco and E. fulvus mayottensis). Cytogenet Cell Genet 78:260–271 (1997).
12.
Nash WG, O’Brien SJ: A comparative chromosome banding analysis of the Ursidae and their relationship to other carnivore. Cytogenet Cell Genet 45:206–212 (1987).
13.
O’Brien SJ, Nash WG, Wildt DE, Bush ME, Benveniste RE: A molecular solution to the riddle of the giant panda’s phylogeny. Nature 317:140–144 (1985).
14.
O’Brien SJ, Wienberg J, Lyons LA: Comparative genomics: lessons from cats. Trends Genet 13:393–399 (1997).
15.
O’Brien SJ, Womack JE, Lyons LA, Moore KJ, Jenkins NA, Copeland NG: Anchored reference loci for comparative genome mapping in mammals. Nature Genet 3:103–112 (1993).
16.
Pecon-Slattery J, O’Brien SJ: Molecular phylogeny of the red panda (Ailurus fulgens). J Hered 86:413–422 (1995).
17.
Qumsiyeh MB: Evolution of number and morphology of mammalian chromosomes. J Hered 85:455–465 (1994).
18.
Raudsepp T, Frönicke L, Scherthan H, Gustavsson I, Chowdhary BP: ZOO-FISH delineates conserved chromosomal segments between horse and man. Chrom Res 4:218–225 (1996).
19.
Rettenberger G, Klett C, Zechner U, Bruch J, Just W, Vogel W, Hameister H: Zoo-FISH: cat and human karyotypes closely resemble the putative ancestral mammalian karyotype. Chrom Res 3:479–486 (1995a).
20.
Rettenberger G, Klett C, Zechner U, Kunz J, Hameister H: Visualization of the conservation of synteny between humans and pigs by heterologous chromosomal painting. Genomics 27:489–496 (1995b).
21.
Watterson GA, Guess HA: Is the most frequent allele the oldest? Theor popul Biol 11:141–160 (1977).
22.
Wayne RK, Nash WG, O’Brien SJ: Chromosomal evolution of the Canidae. I. Species with high diploid numbers. Cytogenet Cell Genet 44:286–305 (1987a).
23.
Wayne RJ, Nash WG, O’Brien SJ: Chromosomal evolution of the Canidae. II. Divergence from the primitive carnivore karyotype. Cytogenet Cell Genet 44:134–141 (1987b).
24.
White MJD: Chromosomal repatterning–regularities and restrictions. Genetics 79:63–72 (1975).
25.
Wienberg J, Stanyon R: Chromosome painting in mammals as an approach to comparative genomics. Curr Opin Genet Dev 5:792–797 (1995).
26.
Wienberg J, Stanyon R: Comparative painting of mammalian chromosomes: Curr Opin Genet Dev 7:784–791 (1997).
27.
Wienberg J, Stanyon R, Jauch A, Cremer T: Homologies in human and Macaca fuscata chromosomes revealed by in situ suppression hybridization with human chromosome specific DNA libraries. Chromosoma 101:265–270 (1992).
28.
Wienberg J, Stanyon R, Nash WG, O’Brien P, Yang F, O’Brien SJ, Ferguson-Smith MA: Conservation of human vs. feline genome organization revealed by reciprocal chromosome painting. Cytogenet Cell Genet 77:211–217 (1997).
29.
Wurster-Hill DH, Bush M: The interrelationship of chromosome banding patterns in the giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca), hybrid bear (Ursus middendorfi × Thalarctos maritimus), and other carnivores. Cytogenet Cell Genet 27:147–154 (1980).
30.
Yang F, Müller S, Just R, Ferguson-Smith MA, Wienberg J: Comparative chromosome painting in mammals: human and the Indian muntjac (Muntiacus muntjak vaginalis). Genomics 39:396–401 (1997).
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.