Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T00:44:37.720Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Compatibility and stability of diploids in Coprinus lagopus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

Lorna A. Casselton  and
D. Lewis
Lorna A. Casselton
Affiliation:
Department of Botany, University College London
D. Lewis
Affiliation:
Department of Botany, University College London
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Artificially selected diploids of Coprinus lagopus when mated in compatible combinations, either together or with haploids, produce dikaryotic mycelia which are typical of normal haploid-haploid dikaryons. In a diploid-haploid dikaryon, the diploid nucleus is not as stable as when alone in a monokaryon but it can persist through repeated sub-culturing into a fruiting body and eventually through meiosis into the basidiospores. In a diploid–diploid dikaryon either one or the other nucleus becomes haploid so that fruiting bodies with two diploid nuclei are never formed. This fact constitutes a restriction on diploidy in nature and a useful method of reducing diploids to the haploid state.

Matings that might be considered to be incompatible at the B mating gene show a significant difference which is related to the number of B alleles common to the mating colonies. Matings with one B allele in common, e.g. B3B6+B2B3 produce fully compatible and normal dikaryons. Matings with two B alleles in common, e.g. B3B6+B3B6 have, at first while the diploid nuclei still persist, the appearance of an incompatible common B haploid heterokaryon. This indicates that the B incompatibility system is based not on a complementary action between different B alleles but on an oppositional action between the same alleles neutralizing the B gene product which is necessary for dikaryon formation.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , August 1966 , pp. 61 - 72
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1966

References

REFERENCES

Casselton, L. A. (1965). The production and behaviour of diploids of Coprinus lagopus. Genet. Res. 6, 190–208.Google Scholar
Cowan, J. W. (1964). Recovery of monokaryons from veil cells of fruit bodies of Coprinus lagopus sensu Buller. Nature, Lond. 204, 1113–1114.Google Scholar
Cowan, J. W. & Lewis, D. (1966). Somatic recombination in the dikaryon of Coprinus lagopus. Genet. Res. 7, 235–244.Google Scholar
Crowe, L. K. (1960). The exchange of genes between nuclei of a dikaryon. Heredity, Lond. 15, 397–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellingboe, A. H. & Raper, J. R. (1962). Somatic recombination in Schizophyllum commune. Genetics, 47, 85–98.Google Scholar
Elliott, C. G. (1960). The cytology of Aspergillus nidulans. Genet. Res. 1, 462–476.Google Scholar
Fincham, J. R. S. & Day, P. R. (1965). Fungal Genetics. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
Giesy, R. M. & Day, P. R. (1965). The septal pores of Coprinus lagopus (FT.) sensu Buller in relation to nuclear migration. Am. J. Bot. 52, 287–293.Google Scholar
Käfer, E. (1961). The processes of spontaneous recombination in vegetative nuclei of Aspergillus nidulans. Genetics, 46, 1581–1609.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. (1960). Genetic control of specificity and activity of the S antigen in plants. Proc. R. Soc. B, 151, 468–477.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. (1961). Genetic analysis of methionine suppressors in Coprinus. Genet. Res. 2, 141–155.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. (1964). A protein dimer hypothesis on incompatibility. Genetics Today. Proc. XI Int. Congr. Genet. Pergamon Press, 657–663.Google Scholar
Middleton, R. B. (1964). Sexual and somatic recombination in common-AB heterokaryons of Schizophyllum commune. Genetics, 50, 701–710.Google Scholar
Parag, Y. (1962). Studies in somatic recombination in dikaryons of Schizophyllum commune. Heredity, Lond. 17, 305–318.Google Scholar
Pontecorvo, G. (1959). Trends in Genetic Analysis. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pontecorvo, G. & Käfer, E. (1956). Mapping the chromosome by means of mitotic recombination. Proc. R. phys. Soc. Edinb. 25, 16–20.Google Scholar
Raper, J. R., Baxter, M. G. & Middleton, R. B. (1958). The genetic structure of the incompatibility factors in Schizophyllum commune. Proc. natn. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 44, 889–900.Google Scholar
Raper, J. R. & Oettinger, M. T. (1962). Anomalous segregation of incompatibility factors in Schizophyllum commune. Revta. Biol. 3, 205–221.Google Scholar
Raper, J. R., Boyd, D. H. & Raper, C. A. (1965). Primary and secondary mutations at the incompatibility loci in Schizophyllum. Proc. natn. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 53, 1324–1332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swiezynski, K. M. & Day, P. R. (1960). Migration of nuclei in Coprinus lagopus. Genet. Res. 1, 129–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar