Chromosome Rearrangement in Evolution

Abstract

Species differ in the number and shape of chromosomes as well as in anatomy, physiology and genetics. Chromosome rearrangement may play an important role in the evolution of species both in how their genomes are expressed and in mechanisms of reproductive isolation.

Keywords: evolution; genome; chromosome; speciation; mutation

Figure 1.

The two genes INS and IGF2 were derived from a duplication event in an ancestral species. Speciation then split species into human and chicken. The INS genes in human and chicken are orthologous, and so are the IGF2 genes, but the INS genes are paralogous to the IGF2 genes.

Figure 2.

The relative‐rate test used to compare the rates of chromosome change in the human (x) and mouse (y) lineages. The diagram shows the rooted tree for human, mouse and chicken, using chicken as the known outgroup. O, denotes the common ancestor of human and mouse.

Figure 3.

Number of chromosome rearrangements between nodes of the phylogenetic tree of birds and mammals. On the left is a scale in millions of years ago (Mya). The circles represent the estimated times of divergence of common ancestors for birds/mammals (300 Mya), rodents and other mammals (100 Mya), and nonrodent mammals (65 Mya). The horizontal broken line represents the Cretaceous–Tertiary (K–T) boundary. The approximate number of chromosome rearrangements is shown along each lineage and in brackets are the rates of chromosomal rearrangement per My. These estimates are based on genetic linkage (including possible ranges) and Zoo‐FISH data. Adapted from Burt et al., .

close

References

Andersson L, Archibald A, Ashburner M et al. (1996) Comparative genome organization of vertebrates: The first international workshop on comparative genome organization. Mammalian Genome 7: 717–734.

Burt DW, Bruley C, Dunn IC et al. (1999) The dynamics of chromosome evolution in birds and mammals. Nature 402: 411–413.

Carver EA and Stubbs L (1997) Zooming in on human‐mouse comparative map: genome conservation re‐examined on a high‐resolution scale. Genome Research 7: 1123–1137.

Gibbons A (1995) When it comes to evolution, humans are in the slow class. Science 267: 1907–1908.

Haldane JBS (1927) The comparative genetics of colour in rodents and carnovora. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 2: 199–212.

Hedrick PW (1981) The establishment of chromosomal variants. Evolution 35: 322–332.

Kazazian HH (2000) L1 retrotransposons shape the mammalian genome. Science 289: 1152–1153.

King M (1993) Species Evolution: The Role of Chromosome Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ridley M (1996) Evolution, 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell Science.

Vavilov NI (1922) The law of homologous series in variation. Journal of Genetics 12: 47–89.

Vogel F, Kopun M and Rathenberg R (1976) In: Goodman M and Tashian RE (eds). Molecular Anthropology, pp. 13–33. New York: Plenum.

Waddington D and Burt DW (2000) Assessing chromosome conservation from genetic maps. Proceedings of the Royal Statistical Society, Reading, September 13–15.

Waddington D, Springbett AJ and Burt DW (2000) A chromosome based model to estimate the number of conserved segments between pairs of species from comparative genetic maps. Genetics 154: 323–332.

White MJD (1978) Modes of Speciation. San Francisco: WH Freeman and Co.

Wienberg J and Stanyon R (1998) Comparative chromosome painting of primate genomes. Institute of Laboratory Animal Research Journal 39: 77–91.

Contact Editor close
Submit a note to the editor about this article by filling in the form below.

* Required Field

How to Cite close
Burt, David W(May 2001) Chromosome Rearrangement in Evolution. In: eLS. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester. http://www.els.net [doi: 10.1038/npg.els.0001500]