Oecomys, Thomas, 1906
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4876.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:190EC586-E14B-4AEF-A5EF-3DA401656159 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4566723 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03A587ED-3207-FFEC-83E9-F88A2E73FDFA |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Oecomys |
status |
|
Oecomys sp. 2
Karyotype: 2n = 64 and FN = 92. Autosomal complement: 15 biarmed pairs large to small decreasing in size, and 16 acrocentric pairs medium to small decreasing in size. Sex chromosomes: X, a large subtelocentric; Y, a medium acrocentric ( Fig. 15A View FIGURE 15 ). C-banding metaphases exhibited blocks of constitutive heterochromatin on the pericentromeric region of the majority of autosomal pairs. The X chromosome presented the short arm entirely heterochromatic. The Y chromosome was almost entirely heterochromatic ( Fig. 15B View FIGURE 15 ). G-banding was performed to allow the correct identification of all homologous pairs ( Fig. 15C View FIGURE 15 ). FISH with telomeric sequences revealed signals at the ends of all chromosome arms, and additional telomeric sequences was found on the pericentromeric region of one medium submetacentric pair ( Fig. 15D View FIGURE 15 ). We compare the karyotype of Oecomys sp. 2 (2n = 64, FN = 92) with O. auyantepui (2n = 64, FN = 110) from Rio Jatapú, Amazonas state of Brazil. These two complements were distinct mainly by the presence of nine acrocentric pairs in Oecomys sp. 2, instead of nine biarm pairs in O. auyantepui , and by the morphology of sex chromosome. Also, the karyotype of Oecomys sp. 2 presents more conspicuous heterochromatic C-band than O. auyantepui . The G-band patterns between the two karyotypes were equally distinct. In addition, Oecomys sp. 2 presented an interstitial telomeric sequence on the pericentromeric region of one medium submetacentric pair, while O. auyantepui presented an interstitial telomeric sequence on the centromeric region of the X chromosome. Based on these comparative analyses, we suggested that the species mentioned here as Oecomys sp. 2 was distinctly from O. auyantepui .
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.