title: Chromosome rearrangements, recombination suppression, and limited segregation distortion in hybrids between Yellowstone cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii bouvieri) and rainbow trout (O. mykiss).
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Introgressive hybridization is an important evolutionary process that can lead to the creation of novel genome structures and thus potentially new genetic variation for selection to act upon. On the other hand, hybridization with introduced species can threaten native species, such as cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii) following the introduction of rainbow trout (O. mykiss). Neither the evolutionary consequences nor conservation implications of rainbow trout introgression in cutthroat trout is well understood. Therefore, we generated a genetic linkage map for rainbow-Yellowstone cutthroat trout (O. clarkii bouvieri) hybrids to evaluate genome processes that may help explain how introgression affects hybrid genome evolution.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The hybrid map closely aligned with the rainbow trout map (a cutthroat trout map does not exist), sharing all but one linkage group. This linkage group (RYHyb20) represented a fusion between an acrocentric (Omy28) and a metacentric chromosome (Omy20) in rainbow trout. Additional mapping in Yellowstone cutthroat trout indicated the two rainbow trout homologues were fused in the Yellowstone genome. Variation in the number of hybrid linkage groups (28 or 29) likely depended on a Robertsonian rearrangement polymorphism within the rainbow trout stock. Comparison between the female-merged F₁ map and a female consensus rainbow trout map revealed that introgression suppressed recombination across large genomic regions in 5 hybrid linkage groups. Two of these linkage groups (RYHyb20 and RYHyb25_29) contained confirmed chromosome rearrangements between rainbow and Yellowstone cutthroat trout indicating that rearrangements may suppress recombination. The frequency of allelic and genotypic segregation distortion varied among parents and families, suggesting few incompatibilities exist between rainbow and Yellowstone cutthroat trout genomes.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Chromosome rearrangements suppressed recombination in the hybrids. This result supports several previous findings demonstrating that recombination suppression restricts gene flow between chromosomes that differ by arrangement. Conservation of synteny and map order between the hybrid and rainbow trout maps and minimal segregation distortion in the hybrids suggest rainbow and Yellowstone cutthroat trout genomes freely introgress across chromosomes with similar arrangement. Taken together, these results suggest that rearrangements impede introgression. Recombination suppression across rearrangements could enable large portions of non-recombined chromosomes to persist within admixed populations.
authors: U,S, Geological Survey, Western Fisheries Research Center, 6505 NE 65th Street, Seattle, WA 98115, USA. costberg@usgs.gov.
authors: Carl O
authors: CO
authors: Ostberg
authors: Lorenz
authors: L
authors: Hauser
authors: Victoria L
authors: VL
authors: Pritchard
authors: John C
authors: JC
authors: Garza
authors: Kerry A
authors: KA
authors: Naish
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D043171:Chromosomal Instability; D002874:Chromosome Mapping; D020090:Chromosome Segregation; D005260:Female; D016678:Genome; D006824:Hybridization, Genetic; D015810:Linkage Disequilibrium; D008297:Male; D017686:Oncorhynchus mykiss / Q000235:genetics*; D011110:Polymorphism, Genetic; D011995:Recombination, Genetic; D012730:Sex Chromosomes / Q000235:genetics
references: Nature. 1989 Oct 12;341(6242):497-503
references: 2677747
references: Genome Biol Evol. 2011;3:830-41
references: 21828374
references: Heredity (Edinb). 2009 Jun;102(6):616-25
references: 19240751
references: Genome Res. 2003 Feb;13(2):272-80
references: 12566405
references: Genome. 2004 Apr;47(2):304-15
references: 15060583
references: Genetics. 2007 Aug;176(4):2489-500
references: 17603096
references: Science. 2009 Jan 16;323(5912):376-9
references: 19074311
references: Evolution. 2006 Aug;60(8):1718-30
references: 17017071
references: J Hered. 2002 Jan-Feb;93(1):77-8
references: 12011185
references: Science. 2003 Aug 29;301(5637):1211-6
references: 12907807
references: Genetics. 2005 May;170(1):375-86
references: 15781698
references: Genetics. 2006 Nov;174(3):1661-70
references: 16951085
references: BMC Genet. 2011 Jul 28;12:68
references: 21798024
references: Evolution. 2001 Mar;55(3):573-86
references: 11327164
references: Cytogenet Genome Res. 2002;96(1-4):40-4
references: 12438778
references: Mamm Genome. 2001 Apr;12(4):318-22
references: 11309665
references: Evolution. 2010 Jul;64(7):2020-32
references: 20148956
references: Genetics. 1983 Apr;103(4):771-83
references: 17246124
references: Evolution. 2001 Mar;55(3):512-21
references: 11327159
references: Genetics. 2003 Mar;163(3):939-53
references: 12663534
references: Genetics. 1995 Nov;141(3):1163-71
references: 8582621
references: Genetica. 1990;80(3):171-4
references: 2379830
references: PLoS One. 2007 Dec 12;2(12):e1294
references: 18074018
references: BMC Genet. 2011 Jun 03;12:54
references: 21639918
references: Evolution. 2001 Apr;55(4):684-91
references: 11392386
references: Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2009 Aug;52(2):406-15
references: 19341807
references: Genetics. 2007 Mar;175(3):1289-306
references: 17179068
references: Genetics. 2007 Jan;175(1):375-98
references: 17110497
references: Annu Rev Genet. 2001;35:31-52
references: 11700276
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 May 9;97(10):5313-6
references: 10779562
references: Genetics. 2001 Dec;159(4):1701-16
references: 11779808
references: Evolution. 2004 Jan;58(1):184-92
references: 15058731
references: Genetics. 2000 Jul;155(3):1331-45
references: 10880492
references: Genetics. 2005 Jan;169(1):347-53
references: 15466426
references: Insect Mol Biol. 1993;2(4):225-37
references: 9087560
references: Cytogenet Genome Res. 2008;121(3-4):255-9
references: 18758167
references: Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2001 Feb;76(1):1-25
references: 11325050
references: Heredity (Edinb). 2001 Sep;87(Pt 3):305-13
references: 11737277
references: Genetics. 2006 Apr;172(4):2405-19
references: 16452148
references: BMC Genomics. 2006 Nov 30;7:302
references: 17137492
references: Trends Ecol Evol. 2001 Jul 1;16(7):351-358
references: 11403867
references: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2012 Feb 5;367(1587):422-9
references: 22201171
references: Heredity (Edinb). 2011 Dec;107(6):496-508
references: 21673743
references: Anim Genet. 2008 Apr;39(2):169-79
references: 18318791
references: Mamm Genome. 2001 May;12(5):331-9
references: 11331939
references: Genetica. 2003 Jan;117(1):27-35
references: 12656570
references: Genetics. 1999 Dec;153(4):1731-41
references: 10581280
references: Isozymes Curr Top Biol Med Res. 1983;10:239-60
references: 6354984
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Oct 9;98(21):12084-8
references: 11593019
references: Science. 2008 Dec 5;322(5907):1559-62
references: 19056989
references: Plant Mol Biol. 2000 Jan;42(1):205-24
references: 10688138
references: Cytogenet Genome Res. 2011;133(1):25-33
references: 21252487
references: Sex Dev. 2009;3(2-3):78-87
references: 19684453
references: Genome. 2005 Dec;48(6):1037-51
references: 16391673
references: Evolution. 2005 Aug;59(8):1768-82
references: 16329246
references: BMC Evol Biol. 2009 Jul 24;9:176
references: 19630983
references: Genetics. 2002 Nov;162(3):1355-66
references: 12454079
references: Genetica. 2001;111(1-3):3-23
references: 11841175
references: BMC Genet. 2008 Nov 19;9:74
references: 19019240
references: Genetics. 2008 Feb;178(2):621-32
references: 18245365