Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T00:47:43.314Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The interpretation of gene conversion data from ordered eight-spored asci

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

J. R. S. Fincham ,
W. G. Hill  and
E. C. R. Reeve
J. R. S. Fincham
Affiliation:
Department of Genetics, University of Edinburgh
W. G. Hill
Affiliation:
Department of Genetics, University of Edinburgh
E. C. R. Reeve
Affiliation:
Department of Genetics, University of Edinburgh
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

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.

Currently favoured models postulate that gene conversion is due to the correction of mis-matches in heteroduplex DNA. If heteroduplex is formed reciprocally on both chromatids participating in recombination, the mis-matches due to a heterozygous site will be different on the two chromatids, and there will be four correction probabilities to be taken into account. It is shown that, given the frequencies of the five different kinds of aberrant ascus ratios, it is possible to calculate four alternative sets of values for the four correction probabilities and the total number of asci in which heteroduplex is formed. These four solutions reduce in effect to two when there are no other markers distinguishing the two chromatids. With the aid of flanking markers and the assumption that heteroduplex formation is chemically polarized, it is possible, in principle, to choose one best solution.

The method has been applied to the five one-point crosses in Sordaria fimicola from which most data are available. The data from four different mutants crossed to wild type are compatible with a restricted model in which the correction frequencies, from mutant to wild and from wild to mutant, are the same on both chromatids. In the case of the fifth mutant the data are not consistent with this restricted model, and indicate different correction frequencies in the two chromatids.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 35 , Issue 2 , April 1980 , pp. 179 - 194
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

References

REFERENCES

Elandt-Johnson, R. C. (1971). Probability Models and Statistical Methods in Genetics. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Emerson, S. (1966). Quantitative implications of the DNA-repair model of gene conversion. Genetics 53, 475–485.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fogel, S., Mortimor, R., Lusnak, K. & Tavares, S.Meiotic gene conversion: a signal of the basic recombination event in yeast. Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology XLIII, 1325–1342.Google Scholar
Holliday, R. (1964). A mechanism for gene conversion in fingi. Genetical Research 5, 282–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hotta, Y. & Stern, H. (1978). DNA unwinding protein from meiotic cells of Lilium. Biochemistry 17, 1872–1880.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kitani, Y. & Olive, L. S. (1967). Genetics of Sordaria fimicola. VI. Gene conversion at the g locus in mutant × wild type crosses. Genetics 57, 767–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitani, Y. & Olive, L. S. (1969). Genetics of Sordaria fimicola. VII. Gene conversion at the g locus in interallelic crosses. Genetics 62, 23–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitani, Y. & Whitehouse, H. L. K. (1974). Aberrant ascus genotypes from crosses involving mutants at the g locus in Sordaria fimicola. Genetical Research 24, 229–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paquette, N. & Rossignol, J.-L. (1978). Gene conversion spectrum of 15 mutants giving post-meiotic segregants in the b2 locus of Ascobolus immersus. Molecular and General Genetics 163, 313–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stadler, U. R. & Towe, A. M. (1971). Evidence for meiotic recombination in Ascobolus involving only one member of a tetrad. Genetics 68, 401–413.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whitehouse, H. L. K. (1974). Genetic analysis of recombination at the g locus in Sordaria fimicola. Genetical Research 24, 251–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar