Eur. J. Entomol. 100 (1): 123-129, 2003 | DOI: 10.14411/eje.2003.022

Test of the correlation between body size and DNA content in Pimelia (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) from the Canary Islands

Miquel PALMER1,*, Eduard PETITPIERRE1,2, Joan PONS3
1 IMEDEA (CSIC-UIB) Instituto Mediterráneo de Estudios Avanzados, Miquel Marques, 21, E-07190 Esporles (Illes Balears), Spain; e-mail: ieampv@uib.es
2 Department Biologia Ambiental. Lab. Genetica, Campus Univ. Illes Balears, Cta Valldemossa km 7,5, E-07071 Palma de Mallorca, Spain
3 The Natural History Museum, Department of Entomology, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, UK

Comparative analyses of interspecific data in evolutionary biology usually require specific methods to remove the effects of phylogenetic inertia. When phylogenetic inertia is not considered, the Canarian Pimelia species show a positive, and almost significant (Prob. = 0.066) correlation between nuclear genome size and body size. However, after controlling for phylogenetic inertia there was a negative and significant correlation (Prob. = 0.007 to 0.017, depending on the DNA fraction considered). Such a change in the relationship after controlling for phylogenetic inertia is rarely reported. Moreover, the relationship usually reported is positive and thought be a consequence of species having a similar number of cells at the same stage of development. The aim of the present study is to report a case of a negative correlation, but not to explain the causal mechanism involved in genome size variations or propose a formal hypothesis on the specific links between DNA content and body size. However, a common explanation of the change in the relationship, i.e., positive to negative, is suggested. Moreover, the data available on the highly repetitive, non-coding satellite DNA allows us to analyse the specific pattern exhibited by this fraction.

Keywords: DNA content, comparative methods, phylogenetic inertia, satellite DNA, nucleotypic effects, microdensitometry, image analysis, Pimelia (Tenebrionidae, Coleoptera)

Received: April 8, 2002; Revised: August 14, 2002; Accepted: October 10, 2002; Published: March 20, 2003  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
PALMER, M., PETITPIERRE, E., & PONS, J. (2003). Test of the correlation between body size and DNA content in Pimelia (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) from the Canary Islands. EJE, 100(1), 123-129. doi: 10.14411/eje.2003.022
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Alvarez-Fuster A., Juan C. & Petitpierre E. 1991: Genome size in Tribolium flour-beetles: inter- and intraspecific variation. Genet. Res., Camb. 58: 1-5 Go to original source...
    2. Bennett M.D. 1971: The duration of meiosis. Proc. R. Soc., Lond. B 178: 259-275 Go to original source...
    3. Bennett M.D. 1972: Nuclear DNA content and minimum generation time in herbaceous plants. Proc. R. Soc., Lond. B 181: 109-135 Go to original source...
    4. Bennett M.D. 1973: Nuclear characters in plants. Brookhaven Symposium of Biology 25: 344-366
    5. Brown J.H., Lomolino M.V. 1998: Biogeography. Sinauer Assoc., Sunderland, 692 p. Cavalier-Smith T. 1985: Introduction: The evolutionary significance of genome size. In: Cavalier-Smith T. (ed.): The evolution of Genome Size. John Wiley, pp. 1-36
    6. Cuerda J. 1975: Los Tiempos Cuaternarios. Institut d'Estudis Balearics, Palma de Mallorca, 304 pp
    7. Damuth J. & MacFadden B.J. 1990: Body Size in Mammalian Paleobiology. Estimating and Biological Implications. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 397 pp
    8. Diniz-Filho J.A.F., de Sant'Ana C.E.R. & Bini L.M. 1998: An eigenvector method for estimating phylogenetic inertia. Evolution 52: 1247-1262 Go to original source...
    9. Elder J.F. & Turner B.J. 1995: Concerted evolution of repetitive DNA sequences in eukaryotes. The Quarterly Review of Biology 70: 297-320 Go to original source...
    10. Felsenstein J. 1985: Phylogenies and the comparative method. Am. Nat. 125: 1-15 Go to original source...
    11. Ferrari J.A. & Rai K.S. 1989: Phenotypic correlates of genome size variation in Aedes albopictus. Evolution 43: 895-899 Go to original source...
    12. Finston T.L., Hebert P.D.N. & Foottit R.B. 1995: Genome size variation in Aphids. Insect. Biochem. Molec. Biol. 25: 189-196 Go to original source...
    13. Fox D.P. 1972: DNA content of related species. Chromosomes Today 3: 32-37
    14. Gittleman J.L. & Kot M. 1990: Adaptation: statistics and null model for estimating phylogenetic effects. Syst. Zool. 39: 227-241 Go to original source...
    15. Gregory T.R., Hebert P.D.N. & Kolasa J. 2000: Evolutionary implications of the relationship between genome size and body size in flatworms and copepods. Heredity 84: 201-208 Go to original source...
    16. Heaney L.R. 1978: Insular area and body size of insular mammals: Evidence from the tri-coloured squirrel (Callosciurus prevosti) of Southeast Asia. Evolution 32: 29-44 Go to original source...
    17. Heartl D.L. 2000: Molecular melodies in High and Low. Nature Reviews Genetics 1:145-149 Go to original source...
    18. Hinegardner R. 1974: Cellular content of the Mollusca. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 74A: 447-460 Go to original source...
    19. Jockusch E.L. 1997: An evolutionary correlate of genome size change in Plethodontid salamanders. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 264: 597-604 Go to original source...
    20. John B. & Miklos G.L.G. 1988: The Eukaryotic Genome in Development and Evolution. Allen & Unwin, London, 416 pp
    21. Juan C., Emerson B.C., Oromi P. & Hewitt G.M. 2000: Colonization and diversification: towards a phylogenetic synthesis for the Canary Islands. TREE 15: 104-109 Go to original source...
    22. Juan C., Oromi P. & Hewitt G.M. 1995: Mitochondrial DNA phylogeny and sequential colonization of Canary Islands by darkling beetles of the genus Pimelia (Tenebrionidae). Proc. R. Soc., Lond. B 261: 173-180 Go to original source...
    23. Juan C. & Petitpierre E. 1989a: C-Banding and DNA content in seven species of Tenebrionidae (Coleoptera). Genome 32: 834-839 Go to original source...
    24. Juan C. & Petitpierre E. 1989b: New chromosomal findings on the Spanish Tenebrionidae (Coleoptera). Caryologia 42: 259-266 Go to original source...
    25. Legendre P. & Legendre L. 1998: Numerical Ecology. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, 853 pp
    26. MacLeish J. & Sunderland N. 1961: Measurements of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) in higher plants by Feulgen photometry and chemical methods. Exp. Cell Res. 24: 527-540 Go to original source...
    27. McLaren I.A., Sevigny J.M. & Corkett C.J. 1988: Body sizes, development rates, and genome sizes among Calanus species. Hydrobiologia 167/168: 275-284 Go to original source...
    28. McLaren I.A., Sevigny J.M. & Frost B.W. 1989: Evolutionary and ecological significance of genome size in the copepod genus Pseudocalanus. Can. J. Zool. 67: 565-569 Go to original source...
    29. Monaghan P. & Metcalfe N.B. 2000: Genome size and longevity. Trends Genet. 16: 331-332 Go to original source...
    30. Morrison D.F. 1976: Multivariate Statistical Methods. McGraw-Hill, New York, 338 pp
    31. Olmo E. 1983: Nucleotype and cell size in vertebrates: a review. Basic Appl. Histochem. 27: 227-256
    32. Oromi P. 1979: Taxonomia numerica de las Pimelia (Col.: Tenebrionidae) del archipielago Canario. Bol. Asoc. Espan. Entomol. 3: 103-118
    33. Palmer M. 1994: Aspectes filogenetics i biogeografics dels Tenebrionidae (Coleoptera) de les Illes Balears. Ph.D. dissertation, Universitat de les Illes Balears, Palma de Mallorca, Spain. Palmer M. & Petitpierre E. 1996: Relationship of genome size to body size in Phylan semicostatus (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 89: 221-225 Go to original source...
    34. Petitpierre E., Carreras I. & Gomez-Zurita J. 1998: Cytogenetic analysis of European Cassida (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae). Hereditas 128: 1-8 Go to original source...
    35. Petitpierre E. & Juan C. 1994: Genome size, chromosomes, and egg-chorion ultrastructure in the evolution of Chrysomelinae. In: Jolivet P.H., Cox M.L. & Petitpierre E. (eds): Novel Aspects of the Biology of Chrysomelidae. Kluwer Acad. Publ., Dordrecht, pp. 213-225 Go to original source...
    36. Petitpierre E., Segarra C. & Juan C. 1993: Genome size and chromosomal evolution in leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Hereditas 119: 1-6 Go to original source...
    37. Plohl M. & Ugarkovic D. 1994: Characterization of two abundant satellite DNAs from the mealworm Tenebrio obscurus. J. Mol. Evol. 39: 489-495 Go to original source...
    38. Pons J. 1999: Evolucion del DNA Satelite en el Genero Pimelia.. Ph.D. dissertation, Universitat de les Illes Balears, Palma de Mallorca, Spain. Pons J., Petitpierre E. & Juan C. 2002: Evolutionary dynamics of satellite DNA family PIM357 in species of the genus Pimelia (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Mol. Biol. Evol. 19: 1329-1340 Go to original source...
    39. Purvis A. & Rambaut A. 1995: Comparative analysis by independent contrasts (CAIC): an Apple Macintosh application for analysing comparative data. Comp.r Appl. Biosci. 11: 247-251 Go to original source...
    40. Rasch E.M. 1985: DNA "standards" and range of accurate DNA estimates by Feulgen absorption microspectrophotometry. In: Cowden R.R. & Harrison F.W. (eds): Advances in Microscopy. Alan. R. Liss, New York, pp. 137-166
    41. Rohlf F.J. & Marcus L.F. 1993: A revolution in morphometrics. TREE 8: 129-133 Go to original source...
    42. Sambrook J., Fritsch E.F. & Maniatis T. 1989: Molecular Cloning: a Laboratory Manual. 2a ed. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor (New York). Sessions S.K. & Larson A. 1987: Developmental correlates of genome size in Plethodontid salamanders and their implications for genomic evolution. Evolution 41: 1239-1251 Go to original source...
    43. Slice D.E., Bookstein F.L. Marcus L.F. & Rohlf F.J. 1996: A glossary for Geometric Morphometrics. In: Marcus L.F., Corti M., Loy A., Naylor G.J.P. & Slice D.E. (eds): Advances in Morphometrics. Plenum Press, New York, pp. 531-551
    44. Sokal R.R. & Rohlf F.J. 1981: Biometry. Freeman & Co., New York, 859 pp
    45. Sparrow A.H., Sparrow R.C., Thompson P.H. & Schairer L.A. 1965: The use of nuclear and chromosomal variables in determining and predicting radiosensitivities. Rad.n Res. Suppl. 5: 101-132
    46. Ter Braak C.J.F. & Smilauer P. 1998: CANOCO Reference Manual and user's guide to Canoco for Windows: Software for Canonical Community Ordination (version 4). Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, NY, USA. Vinogradov A.E. 1995: Nucleotypic effect in homeotherms: body mass-independent resting matabolic rate of mammals is related to genome size. Evolution 49: 1249-1259 Go to original source...
    47. Vinogradov A.E. 1997: Nucleotypic effect in homeotherms: body mass-independent resting matabolic rate of passerine birds is related to genome size. Evolution 51: 220-225 Go to original source...
    48. Vinogradov A.E. 1998: Buffering: a possible passive-homeostasis role for redundant DNA. J. Theor. Biol. 193: 197-199 Go to original source...
    49. White M.M. & McLaren I.A. 2000: Copepod development rates in relation to genome size and 18S rDNA copy number. Genome 43: 750-755 Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content