Análise citogenética em espécies de Hypostominae Lacépède, 1803 (Osteichthyes, Loricariidae) da bacia dos rios Uruguai e Paraná : enfoque biogeográfico e filogenético

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Silva, Vanessa Bueno da
Data de Publicação: 2014
Tipo de documento: Tese
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da Universidade Estadual de Maringá (RI-UEM)
Texto Completo: http://repositorio.uem.br:8080/jspui/handle/1/340
Resumo: Fishes are a wide and diverse group, with many particularities that make it interesting for studying chromosome evolution. Among fishes, Hypostomus is the most specious genus from the subfamily Hypostominae, with considerable intraspecific variation in morphology and color patterns and a high number of species which are not formally described. The great number of species, distributed through most of South America, hinders broad comparative analyses, scenery also observed for cytogenetical, phylogenetical and biogeographical studies on the genus. Even though the number of analyzed species is small compared to the diversity of the genus, studies performed until now show that data obtained from molecular, cytogenetical and biogeographical analyses have been complementing each other, increasing the understanding on the evolution of the group. Regarding cytogenetical analyses, the number of nominal Hypostomus species analyzed is still low. Most analyzed species belong to the Paraná River basin and there are few species belonging to northern basins and none from southern basins where the genus is distributed. Regarding species from Brazil, this would represent mainly species from the Amazonas and Uruguay basins. Since there is great chromosome diversity on the genus, that seems to be related to the distribution of species, the absence of analyses from these regions is an obstacle for undertanding the group. Due to the absence of analyses from potentially important groups in the genus, exitent theories for chromosome evolution in Hypostomus deal with general trends, and there are no analyses of Hypostomus subgroups. Considering the difficulties found in clarifying the evolution of the genus, and that correlations between phylogeny, chromosome evolution and biogeography may help undestanding species differentiation, the present paper aimed to analyze subgroups of closely related Hypostomus species from the Uruguay River. On the first chapter, a bibliographical review is made on the Uruguay River basin and Hypostomus. On the second chapter, three Hypostomus species, H. albopunctatus, H. luteus and H. isbrueckeri, are compared cytogenetically, showing how phylogenetic hypostesis may be correlated with cytogenetics for a better comprehension of complex groups. Since there are species with similar diploid numbers in different clades within Hypostomus, only the diploid number is not enough to separate groups. this research is the first to use the phylogeny of groups within the genus to coordenate the comparison between karyotypes of closely related species. These species are part of the same clade in Hypostomus, which contains all species that occurr only in the Uruguay River basin and some species from Paraná River basin. The results showed great similarity between the chromosome structure of these species, specially H. albopunctatus and H. isbrueckeri. Two species that were once recognized as synonymous, H. luteomaculatus and H. regani, were cytogenetically compared in the third chapter. Both showed the same diploid numbers, chromosome formula and location of the 5S rDNA, being distinguished only by differences on the 18S rDNA sites.this chapter shows the use of cytogenetics in taxonomy, being an important tool for groups that have confusing taxa delimitation. Finally, on chapter four, species from three Hypostominae tribes are analyzed: Rhinelepis aspera, from Rhinelepini, Pterygoplichthys ambrosettii, from Pterigoplichthini and Megalancistrus parananus, from Ancistrini. The correlation of the results with the phylogeny of Hypostominae reveals a diploid number of 52 chromosomes as basal for the tribes Ancistrini and Pterygoplichthini. While most Hypostominae genera show conserved karyotypes, the genera Ancistrus and Hypostomus show divergent chromosome evolution. Considering 2n=54 chromosomes as an ancestral feature for Loricariidae, Rhinelepini shows ancestral diploid numbers. In Hypostominae, the increase of diploid numbers is observed in Hypostomus. Pterygoplichthini shows diploid numbers of 52 chromosomes, with the reduction of one pair compared to the ancestral diploid number. This feature is observed also in many genera from Ancistrini, with the exeption of Ancistrus, that shows a reduction of diploid number. So, Hypostominae as a whole does not show many derived features, since these features are concentrated in genera Hypostomus and Ancistrus.
id UEM-10_ff66cded5bf1580f71621617d0728fb2
oai_identifier_str oai:localhost:1/340
network_acronym_str UEM-10
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da Universidade Estadual de Maringá (RI-UEM)
repository_id_str
spelling Análise citogenética em espécies de Hypostominae Lacépède, 1803 (Osteichthyes, Loricariidae) da bacia dos rios Uruguai e Paraná : enfoque biogeográfico e filogenéticoCytogenetical analysis of Hypostominae Lacépède, 1803 (Osteichthyes, Loricariidae) species from the Uruguai and Paraná River basins: biogeographical and phylogenetic approachCitotaxonomiaEvolução cromossômicaDNArHypostominiBrasil.Chromosome EvolutionrDNACytotaxonomyHypostominiBrazil.Ciências BiológicasBiologia GeralFishes are a wide and diverse group, with many particularities that make it interesting for studying chromosome evolution. Among fishes, Hypostomus is the most specious genus from the subfamily Hypostominae, with considerable intraspecific variation in morphology and color patterns and a high number of species which are not formally described. The great number of species, distributed through most of South America, hinders broad comparative analyses, scenery also observed for cytogenetical, phylogenetical and biogeographical studies on the genus. Even though the number of analyzed species is small compared to the diversity of the genus, studies performed until now show that data obtained from molecular, cytogenetical and biogeographical analyses have been complementing each other, increasing the understanding on the evolution of the group. Regarding cytogenetical analyses, the number of nominal Hypostomus species analyzed is still low. Most analyzed species belong to the Paraná River basin and there are few species belonging to northern basins and none from southern basins where the genus is distributed. Regarding species from Brazil, this would represent mainly species from the Amazonas and Uruguay basins. Since there is great chromosome diversity on the genus, that seems to be related to the distribution of species, the absence of analyses from these regions is an obstacle for undertanding the group. Due to the absence of analyses from potentially important groups in the genus, exitent theories for chromosome evolution in Hypostomus deal with general trends, and there are no analyses of Hypostomus subgroups. Considering the difficulties found in clarifying the evolution of the genus, and that correlations between phylogeny, chromosome evolution and biogeography may help undestanding species differentiation, the present paper aimed to analyze subgroups of closely related Hypostomus species from the Uruguay River. On the first chapter, a bibliographical review is made on the Uruguay River basin and Hypostomus. On the second chapter, three Hypostomus species, H. albopunctatus, H. luteus and H. isbrueckeri, are compared cytogenetically, showing how phylogenetic hypostesis may be correlated with cytogenetics for a better comprehension of complex groups. Since there are species with similar diploid numbers in different clades within Hypostomus, only the diploid number is not enough to separate groups. this research is the first to use the phylogeny of groups within the genus to coordenate the comparison between karyotypes of closely related species. These species are part of the same clade in Hypostomus, which contains all species that occurr only in the Uruguay River basin and some species from Paraná River basin. The results showed great similarity between the chromosome structure of these species, specially H. albopunctatus and H. isbrueckeri. Two species that were once recognized as synonymous, H. luteomaculatus and H. regani, were cytogenetically compared in the third chapter. Both showed the same diploid numbers, chromosome formula and location of the 5S rDNA, being distinguished only by differences on the 18S rDNA sites.this chapter shows the use of cytogenetics in taxonomy, being an important tool for groups that have confusing taxa delimitation. Finally, on chapter four, species from three Hypostominae tribes are analyzed: Rhinelepis aspera, from Rhinelepini, Pterygoplichthys ambrosettii, from Pterigoplichthini and Megalancistrus parananus, from Ancistrini. The correlation of the results with the phylogeny of Hypostominae reveals a diploid number of 52 chromosomes as basal for the tribes Ancistrini and Pterygoplichthini. While most Hypostominae genera show conserved karyotypes, the genera Ancistrus and Hypostomus show divergent chromosome evolution. Considering 2n=54 chromosomes as an ancestral feature for Loricariidae, Rhinelepini shows ancestral diploid numbers. In Hypostominae, the increase of diploid numbers is observed in Hypostomus. Pterygoplichthini shows diploid numbers of 52 chromosomes, with the reduction of one pair compared to the ancestral diploid number. This feature is observed also in many genera from Ancistrini, with the exeption of Ancistrus, that shows a reduction of diploid number. So, Hypostominae as a whole does not show many derived features, since these features are concentrated in genera Hypostomus and Ancistrus.Hypostomus é o gênero mais especioso de Hypostominae, com variação intraespecífica considerável na morfologia e padrões de coloração e um elevado número de espécies ainda não formalmente descritas. O grande número de espécies, distribuídas pela maior parte da América do Sul, dificulta a realização de análises comparativas amplas, cenário também observado nos estudos citogenéticos, filogenéticos e biogeográficos do gênero. Mesmo que a proporção de espécies analisadas ainda seja pequena frente à diversidade do gênero, estudos realizados até o momento indicam que os dados obtidos através de análises moleculares, citogenéticas e biogeográficas têm se complementado, aumentando o entendimento sobre a evolução do grupo. Em relação a análises citogenéticas, o número de espécies nominais de Hypostomus analisadas ainda é baixo. O maior número de espécies analisadas pertence à bacia do rio Paraná e existem poucas análises de espécies pertencentes a bacias do extremo norte e ausência em bacias do extremo sul da área de distribuição do gênero. Em relação a espécies existentes no Brasil, isto representaria principalmente as espécies existentes na bacia do rio Amazonas e na bacia do rio Uruguai. Como existe uma grande diversidade cromossômica no gênero, que parece estar relacionada à distribuição das espécies, a ausência de análises destas regiões torna-se um obstáculo para a compreensão do grupo. Devido à ausência de dados sobre grupos potencialmente importantes dentro do gênero, propostas existentes para a evolução cromossômica de Hypostomus tratam de tendências gerais, e não existem análises de subgrupos de Hypostomus. Considerando as dificuldades encontradas para esclarecer a evolução do gênero, e levando em consideração que correlações entre as hipóteses filogenéticas, evolução cromossômica e biogeografia podem auxiliar no entendimento da diferenciação das espécies, o presente trabalho teve por objetivo analisar subgrupos de espécies próximas de Hypostomus, originárias da bacia do rio Uruguai. No primeiro capítulo é realizada uma revisão bibliográfica sobre a bacia do rio Uruguai e Hypostomus. No segundo capítulo, três espécies de Hypostomus, H. albopunctatus, H. luteus e H. isbrueckeri, foram comparadas citogeneticamente. Estas espécies são parte de um mesmo clado dentro de Hypostomus, que contém todas as espécies que ocorrem somente na bacia do rio Uruguai e algumas espécies da bacia do rio Paraná. Os resultados revelaram uma grande semelhança na estrutura cromossômica, principalmente entre H. albopunctatus e H. isbrueckeri, evidenciando como hipóteses filogenéticas podem ser correlacionadas com a citogenética para uma maior compreensão de grupos complexos. Como existem espécies com números diploides semelhantes em diferentes clados dentro de Hypostomus, somente o número diploide não é o bastante para diferenciar grupos. Este trabalho é o primeiro que utiliza a filogenia de subgrupos dentro do gênero para coordenar a comparação entre os cariótipos de espécies próximas. Duas espécies anteriormente consideradas como sinônimos, H. luteomaculatus e H. regani, foram comparadas citogeneticamente no terceiro capítulo. Ambas apresentaram o mesmo número diploide, formula cromossômica e localização do DNAr 5S, sendo distinguidas citogeneticamente somente através de diferenças nos sítios de DNAr 18S. Este capítulo demonstra a utilização da citogenética na taxonomia, sendo uma importante ferramenta para grupos que apresentam delimitações confusas de taxa. Finalmente, no capítulo quatro, espécies de três tribos de Hypostominae são analisadas: Rhinelepis aspera, de Rhinelepini, Pterygoplichthys ambrosettii, de Pterigoplichthini e Megalancistrus parananus, de Ancistrini. A correlação dos resultados com a filogenia de Hypostominae revela um número diploide de 52 cromossomos como basal para as tribos Ancistrini e Pterygoplichthini. Enquanto a maior parte dos gêneros de Hypostominae apresenta cariótipos conservados, os gêneros Ancistrus e Hypostomus apresentam evoluções cromossômicas divergentes. Considerando 2n=54 cromossomos como característica ancestral para Loricariidae, Rhinelepini apresenta números diplóides ancestrais. Em Hypostominae, observa-se o aumento do número cromossômico em Hypostomus. Pterygoplichthini apresenta números diploides de 52 cromossomos, com redução de um par em comparação ao número considerado ancestral. Esta característica é observada também em diversos gêneros de Ancistrini, com a exceção de Ancistrus, que apresenta redução no número diploide. Desta forma, Hypostominae, como um todo, não apresenta muitas características derivadas citogeneticamente, sendo que essas características estão concentradas nos gêneros Hypostomus e Ancistrus.1 CD-ROM (112 f.)Universidade Estadual de MaringáBrasilPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Biologia ComparadaUEMMaringá, PRVladimir Pavan MargridoCláudio Henrique Zawadzki - UEMWeferson Junior da Graça - UEMOrlando Moreira Filho - UFSCARRoberto Larindondo Lui - UNIOESTESilva, Vanessa Bueno da2018-03-15T12:41:46Z2018-03-15T12:41:46Z2014info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesishttp://repositorio.uem.br:8080/jspui/handle/1/340porinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da Universidade Estadual de Maringá (RI-UEM)instname:Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM)instacron:UEM2018-04-24T20:00:50Zoai:localhost:1/340Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.uem.br:8080/oai/requestopendoar:2024-04-23T14:53:55.119551Repositório Institucional da Universidade Estadual de Maringá (RI-UEM) - Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Análise citogenética em espécies de Hypostominae Lacépède, 1803 (Osteichthyes, Loricariidae) da bacia dos rios Uruguai e Paraná : enfoque biogeográfico e filogenético
Cytogenetical analysis of Hypostominae Lacépède, 1803 (Osteichthyes, Loricariidae) species from the Uruguai and Paraná River basins: biogeographical and phylogenetic approach
title Análise citogenética em espécies de Hypostominae Lacépède, 1803 (Osteichthyes, Loricariidae) da bacia dos rios Uruguai e Paraná : enfoque biogeográfico e filogenético
spellingShingle Análise citogenética em espécies de Hypostominae Lacépède, 1803 (Osteichthyes, Loricariidae) da bacia dos rios Uruguai e Paraná : enfoque biogeográfico e filogenético
Silva, Vanessa Bueno da
Citotaxonomia
Evolução cromossômica
DNAr
Hypostomini
Brasil.
Chromosome Evolution
rDNA
Cytotaxonomy
Hypostomini
Brazil.
Ciências Biológicas
Biologia Geral
title_short Análise citogenética em espécies de Hypostominae Lacépède, 1803 (Osteichthyes, Loricariidae) da bacia dos rios Uruguai e Paraná : enfoque biogeográfico e filogenético
title_full Análise citogenética em espécies de Hypostominae Lacépède, 1803 (Osteichthyes, Loricariidae) da bacia dos rios Uruguai e Paraná : enfoque biogeográfico e filogenético
title_fullStr Análise citogenética em espécies de Hypostominae Lacépède, 1803 (Osteichthyes, Loricariidae) da bacia dos rios Uruguai e Paraná : enfoque biogeográfico e filogenético
title_full_unstemmed Análise citogenética em espécies de Hypostominae Lacépède, 1803 (Osteichthyes, Loricariidae) da bacia dos rios Uruguai e Paraná : enfoque biogeográfico e filogenético
title_sort Análise citogenética em espécies de Hypostominae Lacépède, 1803 (Osteichthyes, Loricariidae) da bacia dos rios Uruguai e Paraná : enfoque biogeográfico e filogenético
author Silva, Vanessa Bueno da
author_facet Silva, Vanessa Bueno da
author_role author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Vladimir Pavan Margrido
Cláudio Henrique Zawadzki - UEM
Weferson Junior da Graça - UEM
Orlando Moreira Filho - UFSCAR
Roberto Larindondo Lui - UNIOESTE
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Silva, Vanessa Bueno da
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Citotaxonomia
Evolução cromossômica
DNAr
Hypostomini
Brasil.
Chromosome Evolution
rDNA
Cytotaxonomy
Hypostomini
Brazil.
Ciências Biológicas
Biologia Geral
topic Citotaxonomia
Evolução cromossômica
DNAr
Hypostomini
Brasil.
Chromosome Evolution
rDNA
Cytotaxonomy
Hypostomini
Brazil.
Ciências Biológicas
Biologia Geral
description Fishes are a wide and diverse group, with many particularities that make it interesting for studying chromosome evolution. Among fishes, Hypostomus is the most specious genus from the subfamily Hypostominae, with considerable intraspecific variation in morphology and color patterns and a high number of species which are not formally described. The great number of species, distributed through most of South America, hinders broad comparative analyses, scenery also observed for cytogenetical, phylogenetical and biogeographical studies on the genus. Even though the number of analyzed species is small compared to the diversity of the genus, studies performed until now show that data obtained from molecular, cytogenetical and biogeographical analyses have been complementing each other, increasing the understanding on the evolution of the group. Regarding cytogenetical analyses, the number of nominal Hypostomus species analyzed is still low. Most analyzed species belong to the Paraná River basin and there are few species belonging to northern basins and none from southern basins where the genus is distributed. Regarding species from Brazil, this would represent mainly species from the Amazonas and Uruguay basins. Since there is great chromosome diversity on the genus, that seems to be related to the distribution of species, the absence of analyses from these regions is an obstacle for undertanding the group. Due to the absence of analyses from potentially important groups in the genus, exitent theories for chromosome evolution in Hypostomus deal with general trends, and there are no analyses of Hypostomus subgroups. Considering the difficulties found in clarifying the evolution of the genus, and that correlations between phylogeny, chromosome evolution and biogeography may help undestanding species differentiation, the present paper aimed to analyze subgroups of closely related Hypostomus species from the Uruguay River. On the first chapter, a bibliographical review is made on the Uruguay River basin and Hypostomus. On the second chapter, three Hypostomus species, H. albopunctatus, H. luteus and H. isbrueckeri, are compared cytogenetically, showing how phylogenetic hypostesis may be correlated with cytogenetics for a better comprehension of complex groups. Since there are species with similar diploid numbers in different clades within Hypostomus, only the diploid number is not enough to separate groups. this research is the first to use the phylogeny of groups within the genus to coordenate the comparison between karyotypes of closely related species. These species are part of the same clade in Hypostomus, which contains all species that occurr only in the Uruguay River basin and some species from Paraná River basin. The results showed great similarity between the chromosome structure of these species, specially H. albopunctatus and H. isbrueckeri. Two species that were once recognized as synonymous, H. luteomaculatus and H. regani, were cytogenetically compared in the third chapter. Both showed the same diploid numbers, chromosome formula and location of the 5S rDNA, being distinguished only by differences on the 18S rDNA sites.this chapter shows the use of cytogenetics in taxonomy, being an important tool for groups that have confusing taxa delimitation. Finally, on chapter four, species from three Hypostominae tribes are analyzed: Rhinelepis aspera, from Rhinelepini, Pterygoplichthys ambrosettii, from Pterigoplichthini and Megalancistrus parananus, from Ancistrini. The correlation of the results with the phylogeny of Hypostominae reveals a diploid number of 52 chromosomes as basal for the tribes Ancistrini and Pterygoplichthini. While most Hypostominae genera show conserved karyotypes, the genera Ancistrus and Hypostomus show divergent chromosome evolution. Considering 2n=54 chromosomes as an ancestral feature for Loricariidae, Rhinelepini shows ancestral diploid numbers. In Hypostominae, the increase of diploid numbers is observed in Hypostomus. Pterygoplichthini shows diploid numbers of 52 chromosomes, with the reduction of one pair compared to the ancestral diploid number. This feature is observed also in many genera from Ancistrini, with the exeption of Ancistrus, that shows a reduction of diploid number. So, Hypostominae as a whole does not show many derived features, since these features are concentrated in genera Hypostomus and Ancistrus.
publishDate 2014
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2014
2018-03-15T12:41:46Z
2018-03-15T12:41:46Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis
format doctoralThesis
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://repositorio.uem.br:8080/jspui/handle/1/340
url http://repositorio.uem.br:8080/jspui/handle/1/340
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual de Maringá
Brasil
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Biologia Comparada
UEM
Maringá, PR
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual de Maringá
Brasil
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Biologia Comparada
UEM
Maringá, PR
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Institucional da Universidade Estadual de Maringá (RI-UEM)
instname:Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM)
instacron:UEM
instname_str Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM)
instacron_str UEM
institution UEM
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da Universidade Estadual de Maringá (RI-UEM)
collection Repositório Institucional da Universidade Estadual de Maringá (RI-UEM)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da Universidade Estadual de Maringá (RI-UEM) - Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1813258627855679488