A Detailed Karyological Investigation of three Endemic Cobitis Linnaeus, 1758 Species (Teleostei, Cobitidae) in Anatolia, Türkiye
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: Comparative cytogenetics is a vital approach for diagnosing chromosome abnormalities and identifying species-specific patterns. In this study, chromosomal analysis of three Anatolian endemic Cobitis species was performed: Cobitis bilseli, C. fahireae, and C. turcica. METHODS: Conventional cytogenetic techniques such as Giemsa staining, C-banding, and Ag-NOR staining were applied, followed by measurements of chromosome arm lengths including analysis of the measured data. RESULTS: The diploid chromosome number, 2n = 50, was determined for all three species. The karyotype formulas were as follows: four pairs of metacentric, 5 pairs of submetacentric, and 16 pairs of subtelo-telocentric chromosomes in C. bilseli; 11 pairs of metacentric, 7 pairs of submetacentric, and 7 pairs of subtelo-telocentric chromosomes in C. fahireae; and 4 pairs of metacentric, 4 pairs of submetacentric, and 17 pairs of subtelo-telocentric chromosomes in C. turcica. Dark C-bands were observed on the pericentromeres of nearly all chromosomes in C. bilseli and C. turcica, whereas light C-bands appeared on the pericentromeres of some chromosomes in C. fahireae. Silver-stained metaphases revealed signals on the short arm of a submetacentric chromosome pair in C. fahireae (each homologous chromosome carries one signal), while in C. bilseli and C. turcica, Ag-NOR signals were detected on the long arm of a single metacentric chromosome (only one homologous chromosome carries the signal, and the signal-carrying chromosome is the largest chromosome in the karyotype). CONCLUSION: This study provides new cytogenetic data consistent with the phylogenetic distances between the studied species, indicating that pericentric inversions and/or translocations govern the formation of Cobitis karyotypes. INTRODUCTION: Comparative cytogenetics is a vital approach for diagnosing chromosome abnormalities and identifying species-specific patterns. In this study, chromosomal analysis of three Anatolian endemic Cobitis species was performed: Cobitis bilseli, C. fahireae, and C. turcica. METHODS: Conventional cytogenetic techniques such as Giemsa staining, C-banding, and Ag-NOR staining were applied, followed by measurements of chromosome arm lengths including analysis of the measured data. RESULTS: The diploid chromosome number, 2n = 50, was determined for all three species. The karyotype formulas were as follows: four pairs of metacentric, 5 pairs of submetacentric, and 16 pairs of subtelo-telocentric chromosomes in C. bilseli; 11 pairs of metacentric, 7 pairs of submetacentric, and 7 pairs of subtelo-telocentric chromosomes in C. fahireae; and 4 pairs of metacentric, 4 pairs of submetacentric, and 17 pairs of subtelo-telocentric chromosomes in C. turcica. Dark C-bands were observed on the pericentromeres of nearly all chromosomes in C. bilseli and C. turcica, whereas light C-bands appeared on the pericentromeres of some chromosomes in C. fahireae. Silver-stained metaphases revealed signals on the short arm of a submetacentric chromosome pair in C. fahireae (each homologous chromosome carries one signal), while in C. bilseli and C. turcica, Ag-NOR signals were detected on the long arm of a single metacentric chromosome (only one homologous chromosome carries the signal, and the signal-carrying chromosome is the largest chromosome in the karyotype). CONCLUSION: This study provides new cytogenetic data consistent with the phylogenetic distances between the studied species, indicating that pericentric inversions and/or translocations govern the formation of Cobitis karyotypes.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».