| Title |
Aneuploid progenies of triploid hybrids between diploid and tetraploid loach Misgurnus anguillicaudatus in China
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genetica, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10709-016-9928-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ya-Juan Li, Yang-Chun Gao, He Zhou, Hai-Yan Ma, Zhong-Qiao Lin, Tian-Yu Ma, Yi Sui, Katsutoshi Arai |
| Abstract |
Triploid Chinese loach, Misgurnus anguillicaudatus, hybrids between tetraploids from Hubei Province and diploids from Liaoning Province were mated with either diploid wild-type or triploid hybrids to analyze viability and ploidy of the resultant progenies. Both triploid males and females generated fertile gametes, but progenies from the crosses using gametes of triploid hybrids did not survive beyond the larval stages. In crosses between wild-type diploid females and triploid hybrid males, embryos ranging from 2.2n to 2.6n were predominant with a mode of either 2.4n (chromosome numbers 59, 60, 61) or 2.5n (chromosome numbers 62, 63). Those from the crosses between triploid hybrid females and diploid males gave a modal ploidy level at approximately 2.5n in one case, but a shift to a higher ploidy level was observed in other embryos. In the progenies between triploid hybrid females and males, the ploidy level at approximately 3.0n (chromosome numbers 74, 75, 76) was most frequent. The cytogenetic results of the progenies suggest the production of aneuploid gametes with a modal ploidy level at approximately 1.5n in triploid hybrids. However, a shift to higher chromosome numbers in gametes was observed in certain cases, suggesting the involvement of mortality selection of gametes and/or zygotes with lower chromosome numbers. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 7 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 29% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 14% |
| Researcher | 1 | 14% |
| Other | 1 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 57% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 29% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 September 2016.
All research outputs
#18,472,072
of 22,889,074 outputs
Outputs from Genetica
#556
of 715 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#243,786
of 321,009 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetica
#4
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,889,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 715 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 321,009 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.