Detecting population structure of Paleosuchus trigonatus (Alligatoridae: Caimaninae) through microsatellites markers developed by next generation sequencing

The Cytogenetic Map of the Nile Crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus, Crocodylidae, Reptilia) with Fluorescence In Situ Localization of Major Repetitive DNAs

Tandemly arranged and dispersed repetitive DNA sequences are important structural and functional elements that make up a significant portion of vertebrate genomes. Using high throughput, low coverage whole genome sequencing followed by bioinformatics analysis, we have identified seven major tandem repetitive DNAs and two fragments of LTR retrotransposons in the genome of the Nile crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus, 2n = 32). The repeats showed great variability in structure, genomic organization, and chromosomal distribution as revealed by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). We found that centromeric and pericentromeric heterochromatin of C. niloticus is composed of previously described in Crocodylus siamensis CSI-HindIII and CSI-DraI repetitive sequence families, a satellite revealed in Crocodylus porosus, and additionally contains at least three previously unannotated tandem repeats. Both LTR sequences identified here belong to the ERV1 family of endogenous retroviruses. Each pericentromeric region was characterized by a diverse set of repeats, with the exception of chromosome pair 4, in which we found only one type of satellite. Only a few repeats showed non-centromeric signals in addition to their centromeric localization. Mapping of 18S-28S ribosomal RNA genes and telomeric sequences (TTAGGG)n did not demonstrate any co-localization of these sequences with revealed centromeric and pericentromeric heterochromatic blocks.

Revisiting the Karyotypes of Alligators and Caimans (Crocodylia, Alligatoridae) after a Half-Century Delay: Bridging the Gap in the Chromosomal Evolution of Reptiles

Although crocodilians have attracted enormous attention in other research fields, from the cytogenetic point of view, this group remains understudied. Here, we analyzed the karyotypes of eight species formally described from the Alligatoridae family using differential staining, fluorescence in situ hybridization with rDNA and repetitive motifs as a probe, whole chromosome painting (WCP), and comparative genome hybridization. All Caimaninae species have a diploid chromosome number (2n) 42 and karyotypes dominated by acrocentric chromosomes, in contrast to both species of Alligatorinae, which have 2n = 32 and karyotypes that are predominantly metacentric, suggesting fusion/fission rearrangements. Our WCP results supported this scenario by revealing the homeology of the largest metacentric pair present in both Alligator spp. with two smaller pairs of acrocentrics in Caimaninae species. The clusters of 18S rDNA were found on one chromosome pair in all species, except for Paleosuchus spp., which possessed three chromosome pairs bearing these sites. Similarly, comparative genomic hybridization demonstrated an advanced stage of sequence divergence among the caiman genomes, with Paleosuchus standing out as the most divergent. Thus, although Alligatoridae exhibited rather low species diversity and some level of karyotype stasis, their genomic content indicates that they are not as conserved as previously thought. These new data deepen the discussion of cytotaxonomy in this family.

Modern cryptic species and crocodylian diversity in the fossil record

Advances in molecular biology and genetics are revealing that many recognized crocodylian species are complexes of two or more cryptic species. These discoveries will have a profound impact on interpretation of the crocodyliform fossil record. Our understanding of ranges of intraspecific variation in modern crocodylian morphology may be based on multiple species and thus express both intraspecific and interspecific variation. This raises questions about our ability to recognize modern species in the fossil record, and it also indicates that specimens from disparate localities or horizons may represent not single widespread species, but multiple related species. Ranges of variation in modern species require a thorough re-evaluation, and we may have to revisit previous perceptions of past crocodyliform diversity, rates of evolution or anagenetic lineages in stratigraphic succession. These challenges will not be unique to those studying crocodyliforms and will require sophisticated approaches to variation among modern and fossil specimens.