HomeAnnals of Tropical Researchvol. 4 no. 2 (1982)

Determination Of The Nature Of Tetraploidy In Cassava Through Meiotic Analysis

Celsa F. Armecin | Azucena L. Carpena

 

Abstract:

The prevalence of normal bivalent pairing at diakinesis and metaphase I and the high percentage of cells having regular meiosis suggest that cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) is an allotetraploid and not an autotetraploid. Based on the results, cassava seems to be a segmental rather than a true allotetraploid as indicated by the presence of multivalents and univalents in 29% of the total meiotic cells observed. This implies partial homology between the chromosomes of the species resulting in segmental pairing of homologous chromosomes. Therefore, cultivated cassava is a segmental allotetraploid with a basic chromosome number of x = 9 and a chromosome number of 2n = 4x = 36.



References:

  1. ABRAHAM, A. 1970. Breeding work on tapioca (cassava) and a few other tropical tuber crops. Proc. 2nd Int. Symp. Trop. Root Crops, Honolulu and Kappa Hawaii 1: 76-78.
  2. JENNINGS. D.L. 1963. Variation in pollen and ovule fertility in varieties of cassava and the effect of interspecific crossing on fertility. Euphytica 12(1): 69-76.
  3. KRISHNAN, R., MAGOON, M.L. and VIJAYA-BAI, K. 1970. The pachytene karyology of Manihot glaziovii. Genet. Iberica 22(3): 177-191.
  4. MAGOON, M. L.. KRISHNAN, R. and VIJAYA-BAI, K. 1969. Morphology of the pachytene chromosomes and meiosis in Manihot esculenta Crantz. Cytologia 34(4): 612-625.
  5. MARTIN, F.W. 1970. Cassava in the world of tomorrow. Proc. 2nd Int. Symp. Trop. Crops, Hawaii 1: 53-58.
  6. PERRY. B.A. 1942. Cytological relationships in the Euphorbiaceae. Virginia J. Sci. 3: 140-144.
  7. PERRY. B.A. 1943. Chromosome number and phylogenetic relationships in the Euphor-biaceae. Amer. J. Botany 30(7): 527-543.
  8. SOHMER, S.H. 1968. Microsporogenesis in Manihot esculenta. Cytologia 33: 97-99.
  9. UMANAH. E.E.. and HARTMANN, R. W. 1973. Chromosome numbers and karyotypes of some Manihot species. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 98(3): 272-274.