Comportamento do Heterocromossômio em alguns Ortópteros do Brasil

Autores

  • S. de Toledo Piza Jor. Universidade de S. Paulo; Escola Superior de Agricultura; Luiz de Queiroz

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1590/S0071-12761945000100006

Resumo

In the present paper the behavior of the heterochromoso-mes in the course of the meiotic divisions of the spermatocytes in 15 species of Orthoptera belonging to 6 different families was studied. The species treated and their respective chromosome numbers were: Phaneropteridae: Anaulacomera sp. - 1 - 2n = 30 + X, n +15+ X and 15. Anaulacomera sp. - 2 - 2n - 30 + X, n = 15+ X and 15. Stilpnochlora marginella - 2n = 30 + X, n = 15= X and 15. Scudderia sp. - 2n = 30 + X, n = 15+ X and 15. Posldippus citrifolius - 2n = 24 + X, n = 12+X and 12. Acrididae: Osmilia violacea - 2n = 22+X, n = 11 + X and 11. Tropinotus discoideus - 2n = 22+ X, n = 11 + X and 11. Leptysma dorsalis - 2n = 22 + X, n = 11-J-X and 11. Orphulella punctata - 2n = 22-f X, n = 11 + X and 11. Conocephalidae: Conocephalus sp. - 2n = 32 + X, n = 16 + X and 16. Proscopiidae: Cephalocoema zilkari - 2n = 16 + X, n = 8+ X and 8. Tetanorhynchus mendesi - 2n = 16 + X, n = 8+X and 8. Gryliidae: Gryllus assimilis - 2n = 28 + X, n = 14+X and 14. Gryllodes sp. - 2n = 20 + X, n = 10- + and 10. Phalangopsitidae: Endecous cavernicola - 2n = 18 +X, n = 94-X and 9. It was pointed out by the present writer that in the Orthoptera similarly to what he observed in the Hemiptera the heterochromosome in the heterocinetic division shows in the same individual indifferently precession, synchronism or succession. This lack of specificity is therefore pointed here as constituting the rule and not the exception as formerly beleaved by the students of this problem, since it occurs in all the species referred to in the present paper and probably also m those hitherto investigated. The variability in the behavior of the heterochromosome which can have any position with regard to the autosomes even in the same follicle is attributed to the fact that being rather a stationary body it retains in anaphase the place it had in metaphase. When this place is in the equator of the cell the heterochromosome will be left behind as soon as anaphase begins (succession). When, on the contrary, laying out of this plane as generally happens (precession) it will sooner be reached (synchronism) or passed by the autosomes (succession). Due to the less kinetic activity of the heterochromosome it does not orient itself at metaphase remaining where it stands with the kinetochore looking indifferently to any direction. At the end of anaphase and sometimes earlier the heterochromosome begins to show mitotic activities revealed by the division of its body. Then, responding to the influence of the nearer pole it moves to it being enclosed with the autosomes in the nucleus formed there. The position of the heterochromosome in the cell is explained in the following manner: It is well known that the heterochromosome of the Orthoptera is always at the periphery of the nucleus, just beneath the nuclear membrane. This position may be any in regard of the axis of the dividing cell, so that if one of the poles of the spindle comes to coincide with it, the heterochromosome will appear at this pole in the metaphasic figures. If, on the other hand, the angle formed by the axis of the spindle with the ray reaching the heterochromosome increases the latter will appear in planes farther and farther apart from the nearer pole until it finishes by being in the equatorial plane. In this way it is not difficult to understand precession, synchronism or succession. In the species in which the heterochromosome is very large as it generally happens in the Phaneropteridae, the positions corresponding to precession are much more frequent. This is due to the fact that the probabilities for the heterochromosome taking an intermediary position between the equator and the poles at the time the spindle is set up are much greater than otherwise. Moreover, standing always outside the spindle area it searches for a place exactly where this area is larger, that is, in the vicinity of the poles. If it comes to enter the spindle area, what has very little probability, it would be, in virtue of its size, propelled toward the pole by the nearing anaphasic plate. The cases of succession are justly those in which the heterochromosome taking a position parallelly to the spindle axis it can adjust its large body also in the equator or in its proximity. In the species provided with small heterochromosome (Gryllidae, Conocephalidae, Acrididae) succession is found much more frequently because here as in the Hemiptera (PIZA 1945) the heterochromosome can equally take equatorial or subequatorial positions, and, furthermore, when in the spindle area it does offer no sereous obstacle to the passage of the autosomes. The position of the heterochromosome at the periphery of the nucleus at different stages may be as I suppose, at least in part a question of density. The less colourability and the surface irregularities characteristic of this element may well correspond to a less degree of condensation which may influence passive movements. In one of the species studied here (Anaulacomera sp.- 1) included in the Phaneropteridae it was observed that the plasmosome is left motionless in the spindle as the autosomes move toward the poles. It passes to one of the secondary spermatocytes being not included in its nucleus. In the second division it again passes to one of the cells being cast off when the spermatid is being transformed into spermatozoon. Thus it is regularly found among the tails of the spermatozoa in different stages of development. In the opinion of the present writer, at least in some cases, corpuscles described as Golgi body's remanents are nothing more than discarded plasmosomes.

Downloads

Os dados de download ainda não estão disponíveis.

Downloads

Publicado

1945-01-01

Edição

Seção

nao definida

Como Citar

Comportamento do Heterocromossômio em alguns Ortópteros do Brasil . (1945). Anais Da Escola Superior De Agricultura Luiz De Queiroz, 2, 173-208. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0071-12761945000100006