Carangidae is a morphologically diverse family of marine fish, characterized by stable karyotypes, predominantly with 2n = 48, composed of acrocentric chromosomes (A). This stability is shared with other families of the order Perciformes, which resulted in the hypothesis that 48A is a plesiomorphic karyotype of the group. We tested this hypothesis in the Carangidae family using comparative phylogenetic methods, investigating the evolution of karyotype characters (including chromosome number, morphology, and number of chromosome arms per karyotype [fundamental number, FN]). Our analyses revealed that 2n = 48 is most likely the ancestral chromosome number for the family. However, an extremely variable number of FNs, always above 48, was observed in basal clades within the family and sister groups. On the other hand, the reduced FN = 48 was consistently observed only in the most derived clades, indicating a tendency for acrocentrization. The number of acrocentric chromosomes apparently was accompanied by a trend of reduction in the genome size (1C-value), suggesting that these changes might be correlated. Our data contradict the marine fish hypothesis that the 2n = 48 acrocentric karyotype is plesiomorphic, at least for Carangidae, and reveal the importance for the correct interpretation of karyotype in a temporal and phylogenetic context.
MoritzC, Worthington-WilmerJ, PopeL, SherwinWB, TaylorAC, LimpusCJ: Applications of genetics to the conservation and management of Australian fauna: four case studies from Queensland. In: Molecular Genetics Approaches to Conservation. SmithTB and WayneRK (eds), pp. 442–456, Oxford University Press, New York, 1996.
3.
HoffmannAA, RiesebergLH. Revisiting the impact of inversions in evolution: from population genetic markers to drivers of adaptive shifts and speciation?. Annu R Ecol Syst, 2008; 39:21–42.
4.
SumnerAT: Chromosomes: Organization and Function. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, 2003.
5.
LeachéAD, SitesJWJr. Chromosome evolution and diversification in North American spiny lizards (Genus Sceloporus). Cytogenet Genome Res, 2009; 127:166–181.
6.
MoraesAP, Souza-ChiesTT, Stiehl-AlvesEM, EggersPBL, Siljak-YakovlevS, BrownSC, et al.Evolutionary trends in Iridaceae: new cytogenetic findings from the New World. Bot J Linn Soc, 2015; 177:27–49.
7.
RevellLJ. Two new graphical methods for mapping trait evolution on phylogenies. Method Ecol Evol, 2013; 4:754–759.
8.
MarinhoRC, Mendes-RodriguesC, BalaoF, OrtizPL, Yamagishi-CostaJ, BonettiAM, et al.Do chromosome numbers reflect phylogeny? New counts for bombacoideae and a review of Malvaceae. Am J Bot, 2014; 101:1456–1465.
9.
MartinezPA, ZuranoJP, AmadoTF, PenoneC, Betancur-RR, BidauCJ, et al.Chromosomal diversity in tropical reef fishes isrelated to body size and depth range. Mol Phylogenet Evol, 2015; 93:1–4.
10.
NelsonJS: Fishes of the World, 4th edn. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, NJ, 2006.
11.
KlinkhardtM, TescheM, GrevenH: Database of Fish Chromosomes. Westarp Wissenschaften, Magdeburg, Germany, 1995.
MolinaWF: Chromosome changes and stasis in marine fish groups. In: Fish Cytogenetics. PisanoE, Ozouf-CostazC, ForestiF and KapoorBG (eds), pp. 69–110, Science Publisher, Enfield, CO, 2007.
FroeseR, PaulyD. FishBase. 2014. Available at www.fishbase.org. (accessed May2015).
16.
CaputoV, MarchegianiF, OlmoE. Karyotype differentiation between two species of carangid fishes, genus Trachurus (Perciformes, Carangidae). Mar Biol, 1996; 127:193–199.
17.
AcciolyIV, BertolloLAC, CostaGWWF, JacobinaUP, MolinaWF. Chromosomal population structuring in carangids (Perciformes) between the north-eastern and south-eastern coasts of Brazil. Afr J Mar Sci, 2012; 34:383–389.
18.
JacobinaUP, VicariMR, MartinezPA, CioffiMB, BertolloLAC, MolinaWF. Atlantic moonfishes: independent pathways of karyotypic and morphological differentiation. Helgol Mar Res, 2013; 67:499–506.
19.
MolinaWF, MartinezPA, BertolloLAC, BidauCJ. Preferential accumulation of sex and Bs chromosomes in biarmed karyotypes by meiotic drive and rates of chromosomal changes in fishes. Ann Braz Acad Sci, 2014; 86:1801–1812.
20.
ReedDL, CarpenterKE, GravelleMJ. Molecular Systematics of the Jacks (Perciformes: Carangidae) based on mitochondrial cytochrome b sequences using parsimony, likelihood, and Bayesian approaches. Mol Phylogenet Evol, 2002; 23:513–524.
21.
SantiniF, CarnevaleG. First multilocus and densely sampled timetree of trevallies, pompanos and allies (Carangoidei, Percomorpha) suggests a Cretaceous origin and Eocene radiation of a major clade of piscivores. Mol Phylogenet Evol, 2015; 83:33–39.
22.
RaboskyDL, SantiniF, EastmanJM, SmithSA, SidlauskasB, ChangJ, et al.Rates of speciation and morphological evolution are correlated across the largest vertebrate radiation. Nat Commun, 2013; 4:1958.
23.
AraiR: Fish Karyotypes: A Check List, 1st edition. Springer, Tokyo, Japan, 2011.
24.
JacobinaUP, CioffiMB, SouzaLGR, CaladoLL, TavaresM, ManzellaJJr., et al.Chromosome mapping of repetitive sequences in Rachycentron canadum (Perciformes: Rachycentridae): implications for karyotypic evolution and perspectives for biotechnological uses. J Biomed Biotechnol, 2011; 1:1–8.
25.
SoaresRX, BertolloLAC, CioffiMB, CostaGWWF, MolinaWF. Chromosomal distribution of two multigene families and the unusual occurrence of an X1X1X2X2/X1X2Y sex chromosome system in the dolphinfish (Coryphaenidae): evolutionary aspects. Genet Mol Res, 2014; 13:2470–2479.
26.
KearseM, MoirR, WilsonA, Stones-HavasS, CheungM, SturrockS, et al.Geneious basic: an integrated and extendable desktop software platform for the organization and analysis of sequence data. Bioinformatics, 2012; 28:1647–1649.
27.
PosadaD. jModelTest: phylogenetic model averaging. Mol Biol Evol, 2008; 25:1253–1256.
28.
StamatakisA. RAxML-VI-HPC: maximum likelihood-based phylogenetic analyses with thousands of taxa and mixed models. Bioinformatics, 2006; 22:2688–2690.
29.
RonquistF, TeslenkoM, van der MarkP, AyresDL, DarlingA, HöhnaS, et al.MrBayes 3.2: efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space. Syst Biol, 2012; 61:539–542.
MaddisonWP, MaddisonDR: Mesquite: A Modular System for Evolutionary Analysis, version 2.75. 2011. Available at www.mesquiteproject.org. (accessed May2015).
33.
Smith-VanizWF: Carangidae: relationships. In: Ontogeny and Systematics of Fishes. MoserHG, RichardsWJ, CohenDM, FahayMP, KendallAWJr. and RichardsonSL (eds), pp. 522–530, American Society Ichthyologists and Herpetologists. Lawrence, Kansas, 1984.
34.
Smith-VanizWF: The living marine resources of the Western Central Atlantic. In: Volume 3: Bone Fishes Part 2. (Opstognathidae to Molidae), Sea Turtles and Marine Mammals. CarpenterKE (ed), pp. 1426–1468, FAO Species Identification Guide for Fishery Purposes and American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists Special Publication, Rome, 2002.
35.
Betancur-RR, BroughtonRE, WileyEO, CarpenterK, LopezJA, LiC, et al.The tree of life and a new classification of bony fishes. PLoS Curr Tree Life, 2013; 18:1–45.
36.
GushikenS. Phylogenetic relationships of the Perciform genera of the family Carangidae. Jpn J Ichthyol, 1988:34; 443–461.
37.
ChaiX, LuLR, ClarkeS. Karyotype analysis of the yellowtail kingfish Seriola lalandi lalandi (Perciformes: Carangidae) from South Australia. Aquacult Res, 2009; 40:1735–1741.
38.
GalettiPMJr., AguilarCT, MolinaWF. An overview of marine fish cytogenetics. Hydrobiologia, 2000; 420:56–62.
39.
MolinaWF, GalettiPMJr. Karyotypic changes associated to the dispersive potential on Pomacentridae (Pisces, Perciformes). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol, 2004; 309:109–119.
40.
JacobinaUP, VicariMR, BertolloLA, MolinaWF. Discriminatory profile of rDNA sites and trend for acrocentric chromosome formation in the genus Trachinotus Lacepede, 1801 (Perciformes, Carangidae). Comp Cytogenet, 2012; 6:359–369.
41.
SolaL, CipelliO, GornungE, RossiAR, AndaloroF, CrosettiD. Cytogenetic characterization of the greater amberjack, Seriola dumerili (Pisces: Carangidae), by different staining techniques and fluorescence in situ hybridization. Mar Biol, 1997; 128:573–577.
42.
RodriguesMM, BaroniS, Almeida-ToledoLF. Karyological characterization of four marine fish species, genera Trachinotus and Selene (Perciformes: Carangidae), from the Southeast Brazilian coast. Cytologia, 2007; 72:95–99.
43.
MolinaWF, MartinezPA, BertolloLAC, BidauCJ. Evidence for meiotic drive as an explanation for karyotype changes in fishes. Mar Genomics, 2014; 15:29–34.
44.
HeemertC. Somatic pairing and meiotic nonrandom disjunction in a pericentric inversion of Hylemya antiqua. Chromosoma, 1977; 59:193–206.
45.
WilbyAS, ParkerS. Mendelian and non-Mendelian inheritance of newly-arisen chromosome rearrangements. Heredity, 1998; 60:263–268.
46.
VenkateshB. Evolution and diversity of fish genomes. Curr Opin Genet Dev, 2003; 13:588–592.
47.
KidwellMG. Transposable elements and the evolution of genome size in eukaryotes. Genetica, 2002; 115:49–63.
48.
AdamsCG, GentryAW, WhybrowPJ. Dating the terminal Tethyan event. 646 Utr. Micropaleontol Bull, 1983; 30:273–298.
49.
SteiningerFF, RöglF. The paratethys history. A contribution towards the 915 Neogene geodynamics of the alpine orogene. Ann Geol Pays Hell, 1979; 916:1153–1165.
50.
HeydtVD, DijkstraA, BerggrenWA. Effect of ocean getways on the global ocean circulation in the late Oligocene and early Miocene. Paleoceanography, 2006; 21:PA1011.
51.
GroeneveldJC, GopalK, GeorgeRW, MattheeCA. Molecular phylogeny of the spiny lobster genus Palinurus (Decapoda: Palinuridae) with hypotheses on speciation in the NE Atlantic/Mediterranean and SW Indian Ocean. Mol Phylogenet Evol, 2007; 45:102–110.
52.
BerggrenWA, HollisterCD. Paleogeography, paleobiogeography and the history of circulation in the Atlantic Ocean. Wood Hole Oceanogr Inst Coll Rep, 1974; 20:126–186.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
