Genetica (2011) 139:79–90

DOI 10.1007/s10709-010-9495-3

SI-MOLECULAR TECHNOLOGIES TO IMPROVE SIT

Mitotic and polytene chromosomes analysis of the oriental fruit

fly, Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae)
Antigone Zacharopoulou • Antonios A. Augustinos •

Waheed A. A. Sayed • Alan S. Robinson •

Gerald Franz

Received: 28 May 2010 / Accepted: 27 August 2010 / Published online: 16 September 2010
Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Abstract The Oriental fruit fly, Batrocera dorsalis s.s. five autosomes. The most important landmarks of each
(Hendel) is one of the most destructive agricultural pests, polytene chromosome and characteristic asynapsis at a
belonging to a large group of difficult to distinguish mor- specific chromosomal region are presented and discussed.
phologically species, referred as the B. dorsalis complex. Chromosomal homology between B. dorsalis and Ceratitis
We report here a cytogenetic analysis of two laboratory capitata has been determined by comparing chromosome
strains of the species and provide a photographic polytene banding patterns. The detection of chromosome inversions
chromosome map from larval salivary glands. The mitotic in both B. dorsalis strains is shown and discussed. Our
complement consists of six chromosome pairs including a results show that the polytene maps presented here are
heteromorphic sex (XX/XY) chromosome pair. Analysis of suitable for cytogenetic analysis of this species and can be
the polytene complement has shown a total of five polytene used for comparative studies among species of the Teph-
chromosomes (10 polytene arms) that correspond to the ritidae family. They also provide a diagnostic tool that
could accelerate species identification within the B. dor-
salis complex and could shed light on the ongoing speci-
Electronic supplementary material The online version of this ation in this complex. Polytene chromosome maps can
article (doi:10.1007/s10709-010-9495-3) contains supplementary
material, which is available to authorized users.
facilitate the development of biological control methods
and support the genome mapping project of the species that
A. Zacharopoulou (&)
W. A. A. Sayed
is currently in progress.
A. S. Robinson
G. Franz
Joint FAO/IAEA Programme of Nuclear Techniques in Food
Keywords Bactrocera dorsalis
Polytene chromosomes

and Agriculture, International Atomic Energy Agency,
Agency’s Laboratories, Seibersdorf, Austria Mitotic chromosomes
Chromosome inversions

e-mail: [email protected] Diptera
Tephritidae
W. A. A. Sayed
e-mail: [email protected]
A. S. Robinson Introduction
e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]
G. Franz The Oriental fruit fly, Batrocera dorsalis s.s. (Hendel) is
e-mail: [email protected] one of the most destructive pests of agriculture (Clarke
et al. 2005). It is a polyphagous species attacking more than
A. Zacharopoulou
A. A. Augustinos
170 types of fruits and vegetables among which are many
Department of Biology, University of Patras,
Patras 26500, Greece of significant economic importance, as commercially
e-mail: [email protected] grown fruits. The species is widespread in various coun-
tries of Southeast Asia and the Pacific regions (White and
Present Address:
Elson-Harris 1992; Drew and Hancock 1994). Outside
W. A. A. Sayed
Biological Application Department, Nuclear Research Centre, Asia, it is currently present on all major Hawaiian Islands
Atomic Energy Authority, Cairo, Egypt after being accidentally introduced into Hawaii between

123
80 Genetica (2011) 139:79–90

the years 1944 and 1945 (Mau 2007). Several infestations Recently, the complete sequence of the mitochondrial
have also been reported in California but these were genome has been published (Yu et al. 2007) providing a tool
eradicated between 1960 and 1997. While not established for species diagnosis and for population genetic analysis.
in Florida, Oriental fruit flies are occasionally trapped in A hobo related element, hopper, has been isolated from
this state (CDFA 2008). Given its polyphagy, dispersal a wild type strain of B. dorsalis s.s. (Handler and Gomez
capacity and the capability of adapting to new areas, the 1997) and a second hopper from a mutant strain, the
Oriental fruit fly has been recognized as key pest of Asia– B. dorsalis white eye strain, exhibiting features consistent
Pacific regions and is listed as an important quarantine with transpositional activity (Handler 2003). If these ele-
species in most countries (White and Elson-Harris 1992; ments prove to be active they may provide tools for
Drew and Hancock 1994; Clarke et al. 2005). transposon-mediated transformation and mutagenesis. TEs
B. dorsalis s.s. is a member of a large group of difficult have been characterized as ‘powerful facilitators of evo-
to distinguish morphological species, referred as the lution’ (Oliver and Greene 2009) and the presence of the
B. dorsalis complex. The early works of Drew (1989) and aforementioned elements in B. dorsalis may be associated
Drew and Hancock (1994) have led to considerable focus with the rapid evolution processes in this species complex
on these species aimed at identifying the different entities. (Clarke et al. 2005).
Up to now, seventy-five entities have been identified in this Polytene chromosomes represent very important tools
rapidly evolving complex species, which includes several for the analysis of the genetic organization of the chro-
species of major agricultural importance (Clarke et al. mosomes and the genome as a whole (Zhimulev et al.
2005). Hybridization between species within the complex 2004). They have been used in studies related to phylo-
has been reported or suspected based either on laboratory genetic relationships among species (Carson and Yoon
studies (McInnis et al. 1999; Tan 2000) or in nature (Wee 1982; Lacovaara and Saura 1982; Lemeunier et al. 1986),
and Tan 2005). as tools for distinguishing members of species complexes
Incursions of flies of this complex into Australia, Oce- (Coluzzi et al. 1979) and contributed significantly to gen-
ania, Central America, Africa and continental United States ome mapping projects [e.g. (Adams et al. 2000; Holt et al.
have stimulated studies in applied and quarantine research 2002)]. Moreover, in C. capitata, the model species for
during the last decade. Most of these studies were focused insects of economic importance, polytene chromosomes
on the development of diagnostic tools for species recog- have helped to improve the sterile insect technique (SIT)
nition within the complex (Adsavakulchai et al. 1998; by supporting the development of genetic sexing strains
Muraji and Nakahara 2002; Jamnongluk et al. 2003; (Robinson et al. 1999; Gariou-Papalexiou et al. 2002;
Lawson et al. 2003; Drew et al. 2008), quarantine (Naka- Franz 2005).
hara et al. 2000; Follett and McQuate 2001) and eradica- Here we present the mitotic karyotype and salivary
tion (Malavasi et al. 2000; Seewootuthum et al. 2000). gland polytene chromosome maps of B. dorsalis s.s.
However, many of the available diagnostic keys, based (Hendel). We show that the quality of polytene chromo-
mainly on morphological characters, are variable at the somes permits the cytogenetic analysis of the species and
species level and suitable only for good quality adult allows comparative studies to other Tephritid species,
specimens. Given these problems, efforts have focused on providing thus a genetic tool that would facilitate the rec-
developing other more reliable diagnostic characters, par- ognition of members in the B. dorsalis complex. These
ticularly molecular tools. Despite their economic impor- polytene chromosome maps would support the develop-
tance, knowledge at the genetic and molecular level has ment of genetic control techniques for the species. Last, but
remained relatively limited. not least, they could support the genome mapping project
At the cytological level, mitotic chromosome differences of the species that is currently in progress (USDA, Agri-
have helped to distinguish entities within the B. dorsalis cultural Research Service).
complex, including B. dorsalis s.s. (Hunwattanakul and
Baimai 1994; Baimai 1998; Baimai et al. 1995, 1999a, b,
2000). Several autosomal recessive mutations were descri-
bed for B. dorsalis s.s., belonging to five linkage groups Materials and methods
[reviewed in McCombs and Saul (1992)]. Efforts have also
been made in developing molecular markers for species Bactrocera dorsalis strains
identification (Armstrong et al. 1997; Armstrong and
Cameron 2000; Muraji and Nakahara 2001, 2002; Nakahara A wild type strain and a translocation-based genetic sexing
et al. 2001; Naeole and Haymer 2003) or for the analysis of strain (GSS) of B. dorsalis, maintained at the Entomology
the genetic structure of natural populations (Aketarawong Unit, FAO/IAEA Agriculture and Biotechnology Labora-
et al. 2007; Chen and Ye 2008; Nakahara et al. 2008). tory, Seibersdorf were used in this study. The wild type

123
Genetica (2011) 139:79–90 81

strain was derived from pupae send to Seibersdorf from the Results
Institute of Radiation for Agricultural Development,
Thailand. The GSS, constructed by McCombs and Saul Mitotic chromosomes
(1995), was established in Seibersdorf from a strain that is
being mass reared in Hawaii (McInnis personal commu- The analysis of metaphase spreads from the laboratory
nication). Adults of both strains were fed on a mixture strains showed that both belong to the B. dorsalis s.s., a
(1:1:3) of yeast:wheat germ:sugar, respectively. Larvae member of the B. dorsalis complex. The mitotic karyotype,
were reared on artificial medium containing 28% wheat referred to as form A, which, according to Baimai et al.
bran, 7% brewer’s yeast, 13% sugar, 0.28% sodium ben- (1995), represents the most ancestral form of the B. dor-
zoate and 1.7% HCl. salis complex and consists of five pairs of autosomes and
one pair of heteromorphic sex chromosomes, XX in
Mitotic chromosome preparations females and XY in males (Fig. 1). The autosomes can be
differentiated by size and arm ratio and are labelled II to VI
Spread chromosome preparations were made from brain in descending order of size (Fig. 1b). The two longest (II,
ganglia of late third instar larvae (Zacharopoulou 1990). III) and the two shorter (V, VI) autosomes are submeta-
Brain tissue was dissected in saline solution (0.7% NaCl,) centric while chromosome IV is metacentric. The sex
and transferred to hypotonic solution (1% sodium citrate) chromosomes (pair I) are the smallest of the set; the X is
on a depression slide for at least 15 min and then fixed for long while the Y is dot-like. The X chromosome has two
3 min in freshly prepared fixative (methanol:acetic acid constrictions, one in the middle that probably represents the
3:1) with several changes to ensure the complete removal centromere and a second one close to one tip (Fig. 1c). One
of water. At the end of fixation, the fixative was removed arm is darkly stained following Giemsa and C-banding and
and a small drop of 60% acetic acid was added. Working seems to be totally heterochromatic. The opposite arm
quickly under a Leitz stereoscope, the tissue was dispersed stains lighter and shares characteristics of both euchroma-
by repeated drawing the material up into a micropipette. tin and heterochromatin, as indicated by differences in the
The cell suspension was finally laid on a clean slide placed degree of staining and chromatid separation compared to
on a warm hotplate (40–45°C) for drying. Chromosomes autosomes (Fig. 1a, d). This is in agreement with all pre-
were stained with 5% Giemsa in 10 mM phosphate buffer viously analysed Tephritid species (Ceratitis capitata,
(pH 6.8). The technique described by Selivon and Peron- Bactrocera oleae, Bactrocera tryoni, Bactrocera cucurbi-
dini (1997) was used for C-banding. tae and Anastrepha ludens). In all these species, the X
chromosome is mostly heterochromatic and is not poly-
tenised (see below). The Y chromosome is entirely het-
Polytene chromosome preparations erochromatic as in all Tephritid species analysed so far.

Polytene chromosome preparations were made from well- Polytene chromosomes

fed third instar larvae (Zacharopoulou 1990). Larvae were
dissected quickly in 45% acetic acid and salivary glands Polytene chromosomes of B. dorsalis s.s. are difficult
were transferred to 3 N HCl on a depressed slide for 1 min. material to work with due to characteristics that are common
Glands were fixed in glacial acetic acid:water:lactic acid to other Tephritid species, such as extensive inter- and intra-
(3:2:1, respectively) for about 5 min (until transparent) ectopic pairing, frequent chromosome breaks and coiling
before being stained in lactoacetic orcein for 5–7 min. and twisting of chromosomes. A large, high-density het-
Before squashing, any excess stain was removed by erochromatic mass, in which the polytene elements are
washing the glands in lactoacetic acid. Chromosome slides connected, was observed in polytene nuclei (Fig. 2).
were analyzed at 1009 magnification using a Leitz phase However, in most of the well spread nuclei this hetero-
contrast microscope. Well spread nuclei or isolated chro- chromatic structure is split into several fragments probably
mosomes were photographed using a CD camera. due to the squashing procedure. In these cases, fragments of
the heterochromatic mass are associated with individual
chromosomes and/or groups of chromosomes (Supplemen-
Construction of photographic polytene maps tary Material, ESMs_1–3), indicating a loose ‘‘chromocen-
ter’’. This observation greatly facilitates the identification of
Photographs showing the best morphology for each chro- the centromeric region of each chromosome, with the only
mosome region were selected. These regions were assem- exception being 3R that is usually found dissociated from
bled using the Adobe Photoshop CS2 software to construct the heterochromatic mass (Supplementary Material,
the composite photographic map for each chromosome. ESMs_1–3).

123
82 Genetica (2011) 139:79–90

Fig. 1 Bactrocera dorsalis s.s.

mitotic karyotype. Giemsa
staining of mitotic metaphases
from Bactrocera dorsalis s.s.
a Male larva X and Y
chromosomes are indicated.
b–d Female larvae; c C-banding
metaphase from a female larva.
Asterisk indicates the secondary
constriction of X chromosome;
d the five autosomes and the X
chromosome are shown and
arrows indicate the centromeres

analysed Tephritid species and further supports the het-

erochromatic nature of both sex chromosomes.
One of the most striking features of B. dorsalis polytene
chromosomes, observed in both strains, is the high number
of chromosome inversions (Supplementary Material,
ESM_4). Most of them were found on the 2R chromosome
arm. However, there is evidence that such rearrangements
are distributed over most or even all polytene elements.
The frequent asynapsis of the two homologous chromo-
somes of several polytene elements, observed in many
preparations, could be attributed to heterozygous rear-
rangements (data not shown).
An additional feature observed in many preparations of
both strains is the asynapsis of a specific chromosomal
region on the right arm of chromosome 5 (Sections 73–74)
(Supplementary Material, ESM_5). In some of these cases
Fig. 2 Bactrocera dorsalis s.s. polytene nucleus. The chromocenter
(Ch) is shown. Note its partial disruption by light pressure of small deletions were detected as well as differences in the
squashing. Some of the chromosome arms are still connected to the puffing patterns of the two homologous chromosomes in
chromocenter the asynaptic region.
The characteristic telomeric regions of each chromo-
some arm allowed them to be differentiated and identified
B. dorsalis polytene nuclei contain five banded elements (Supplementary Material, ESMs_1–3). In addition, many
that correspond to the five autosomes of the mitotic bands along each chromosome show a distinctive appear-
karyotype (Supplementary Material, ESMs_1,2). No evi- ance providing landmarks for identification. Some of the
dence of sex chromosome polytenization was observed telomere regions show ectopic pairing to other telomeres, a
after analysis of a significant number of chromosome phenomenon also observed in other Tephritidae species.
preparations from both the wild type and the genetic sexing The polytene chromosomes were numbered 2–6 to
strain. This observation is consistent with previously indicate homology to C. capitata, based on banding pattern

123
Genetica (2011) 139:79–90 83

similarity of specific chromosomal regions. This number- ESMs_1–3). The 2L arm exhibits numerous weak points,
ing does not imply any correlation to the mitotic chromo- which, coupled with the frequent coiling, result in difficulties
somes. B. dorsalis s.s polytene chromosome reference to follow the linear arrangement along the entire arm’s length
maps and their banding patterns comparison to C. capitata (Supplementary Material, ESMs_1,2). Possibly, much of the
chromosome maps are presented in Figs. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. coiling is due to chromosomal rearrangements. In fact,
several inversions were detected; one of them is shown in
Supplementary Material (ESM_4). However, the tip and the
Chromosome 2, sections 1–20 (Fig. 3) distal regions (Sections 1–3) have more constant and clear
bands that contribute significantly to the identification of this
Chromosome 2 is a long chromosome, with the left arm arm. In contrast to 2L, 2R has a clear banding pattern along
being longer than the right. The centromeric region of the its length allowing easy identification (Fig. 3 and Supple-
two arms is always connected to the heterochromatic mass, mentary Material, ESMs_1,2). Although the proximal region
allowing their identification (Supplementary Material, is easily recognised (Supplementary Material, ESM_3),

Fig. 3 Reference map of

Bactrocera dorsalis s.s. (Bd)
chromosome 2 (Sections 1–20)
and banding pattern comparison
with Ceratitis capitata (Cc)
chromosome 2 (C, centromere).
Sections that can be used as
diagnostic landmarks for
B. dorsalis s.s. chromosome 2
(a–e) are underlined. Dot lines
connecting the chromosomes
indicate sections with similar
banding pattern and arrows
show their relative orientation to
each other. One inversion
relative to C. capitata is shown
in 2L arm

Fig. 4 Reference map of

Bactrocera dorsalis s.s. (Bd)
chromosome 3 (Sections 21–40)
and banding pattern comparison
with Ceratitis capitata (Cc)
chromosome 3 (C, centromere).
Sections that can be used as
identification markers for
B. dorsalis chromosome 3 are
underlined. Dot lines between
the chromosomes indicate
sections with similar banding
pattern and arrows show their
relative orientation to each
other. Three transpositions on
B. dorsalis 3L with inverted
orientation relative to C.
capitata 3L arm are shown.
Note the difference between the
relative arm lengths of this
chromosome in the two species

123
84 Genetica (2011) 139:79–90

Fig. 5 Reference map of Bactrocera dorsalis s.s. (Bd) chromosome 4 chromosomes indicate sections with similar banding pattern and
(Sections 41–60) and banding pattern comparison with Ceratitis arrows show their relative orientation to each other. The 4L arm of
capitata (Cc) chromosome 4 (C, centromere). Sections which permit B. dorsalis is mostly colinear with C. capitata 4L. One inversion was
the identification of the B. dorsalis chromosome 4 are underlined. found in the middle of 4L arm as compared to C. capitata. In 4R, the
Asterisk indicates the region that forms the Balbiani ring; the 4R similarity is limited to specific sections, as these in the telomere and
telomere and the distal region (Sections 57–60) are the most distal regions (Sections 57–60) and in pericentromeric region
prominent area of this chromosome arm. Dot lines connecting the (Section 52)

Fig. 6 Reference map of Bactrocera dorsalis s.s. (Bd) chromosome 5 Banding pattern similarity of B. dorsalis and C. capitata chromosome
(Sections 61–80) and banding pattern comparison with Ceratitis 5 is remarkable. The B. dorsalis chromosome 5 differs by three
capitata (Cc) chromosome 5 (C, centromere). The most important transpositions in 5L arm, one of them with inverted orientation, one
landmarks of B. dorsalis chromosome 5 are underlined. Dot lines paracentric inversion in 5R and a paracentric one relative to
connecting the chromosomes indicate sections with similar banding C. capitata chromosome 5
pattern and arrows show their relative orientation to each other.

the telomeric region shows some degree of variability. breakpoints that were detected in this region (Supplementary
This variation seems to be correlated with the presence or Material, ESM_4). Characteristic regions that can be used as
absence of puffs at this end and/or with the inversion identification landmarks are underlined in Fig. 3.

123
Genetica (2011) 139:79–90 85

Fig. 7 Reference map of Bactrocera dorsalis s.s. (Bd) chromosome 6 pattern and arrows show their relative orientation to each other. One
(Sections 81–100) and banding pattern comparison with Ceratitis inversion in B. dorsalis 6L relative to C. capitata 6L arm is shown.
capitata chromosome 6 (C, centromere). Underlined sections show Banding pattern similarity of the 6R tip and the distal regions
the chromosomal regions which can be used as identification markers (Sections 98–100) is obvious, although two transpositions are
of the B. dorsalis chromosome 6. Dot lines connecting the chromo- observed in B. dorsalis, in relation to C. capitata
somes of the two species indicate sections with similar banding

A limited similarity was found with the C. capitata Chromosome 4, sections 41–60 (Fig. 5)
chromosome 2, restricted mainly to telomeric and peri-
centromeric regions. One inversion was found in 2L arm Chromosome 4 is a feasible polytene element to identify.
relative to C. capitata 2L chromosome arm (Fig. 3). The centromere is obvious by its heterochromatic nature
and its frequent association with the heterochromatic mass
(Supplementary Material, ESMs_2,3). The tips and the
Chromosome 3, sections 21–40 (Fig. 4) pericentromeric regions of both arms are identified by their
characteristic banding patterns. The left arm is longer than
It is the most ‘‘difficult’’ chromosome of the set to analyse, the right. The most important landmarks of this element are
especially 3R. Very few nuclei were found to include this underlined and shown in Fig. 5.
arm and even in these cases it was broken or dissociated Homology of this chromosome with C. capitata chro-
from the heterochromatic mass (Supplementary Material, mosome 4 is supported by the extensive similarity of
ESMs_1,2). 3L has a better banding pattern across its length banding patterns between the two species. One inversion in
and is usually connected to the heterochromatic mass the middle of 4L was found as compared to C. capitata 4L
(Supplementary Material, ESMs_2,3). The most prominent arm (Fig. 5).
chromosomal regions that can be used as identification
markers are shown in Fig. 4. Chromosome 5, sections 61–80 (Fig. 6)
Comparison of B. dorsalis and C. capitata chromosome
3 revealed an extensive similarity of banding pattern for Chromosome 5 is the longest polytene element of the
3L. The two arms differ by three transpositions, all of them complement and 5L is significantly longer than 5R. The
in reverted orientation relative to C. capitata. We did not centromere is defined by a constriction, which is usually
find a sufficient banding pattern affinity between B. dor- dissociated from the chromocenter and carries very little or
salis 3R and C. capitata 3R, with the exception of the tips. no heterochromatic material (Supplementary Material,
In addition, a prominent difference between the relative ESM_3). 5L has a distinctive banding pattern across most of
arm lengths of this chromosome in the two species was its length and 5R exhibits the best banding pattern of the
found (Fig. 4). whole set (Fig. 6 and Supplementary Material, ESMs_1–3).

123
86 Genetica (2011) 139:79–90

The map of this chromosome, along with its landmarks is The heterogametic karyotype (XY) was ascribed to the
shown in Fig. 6. male. Male heterogamety in B. dorsalis s.s is supported by
The homology of chromosome 5 between B. dorsalis the fact that a Y-autosome translocation is inherited
and C. capitata is apparent according to banding pattern exclusively through the males (McCombs and Saul 1995).
similarities of the two chromosomes. Three transpositions, The same situation holds for all Tephritid species analysed
one of them in reverted orientation on the left arm, a so far. The exact structure of this translocation was also
paracentric inversion on 5R and a pericentric inversion of determined genetically and cytogenetically (unpublished
this chromosome relative to C. capitata are shown in data).
Fig. 6. In B. dorsalis polytene nuclei, five banded polytene
elements were found that correspond to the five autosomes,
Chromosome 6, sections 81–100 (Fig. 7) consistent with previous results for other Tephritid species.
A large heterochromatic mass was observed in polytene
Chromosome 6 is long with 6L being significantly longer nuclei to which the polytene elements are connected
than 6R, an analogous situation to chromosome 5. Both (Fig. 2). However, the splitting of this mass into several
arms have a banding pattern of sufficient quality, permit- fragments associated to centromeric regions of chromo-
ting the identification of this chromosome. The 6R arm is somes during slide preparation constitutes evidence of a
fragile, exhibiting many weak points. Characteristic land- ‘‘loose chromocenter’’. A similar observation was made in
marks of this chromosome are underlined in Fig. 7. B. oleae (Mavragani-Tsipidou et al. 1992), B. tryoni (Zhao
The homology between chromosome 6 of B. dorsalis et al. 1998) and Rhagoletis cerasi (Kounatidis et al. 2008).
and C. capitata is obvious, based on their banding pattern However, in C. capitata and B. cucurbitae the size and the
similarities. The tips, as well as distal regions of B. dorsalis density of the heterochromatic mass is different (Zacha-
s.s. are matched to respective regions of C. capitata. One ropoulou 1990; Zacharopoulou et al. manuscript in prepa-
inversion on 6L and two transpositions on 6R relative to ration). This structure possibly represents under-replicated
C. capitata are shown in Fig. 7. centromeric and pericentromeric chromosomal regions.
The observed differences in the size and the structure of the
heterochromatic mass possibly reflect differences in the
Discussion amount of pericentromeric heterochromatin among these
species.
The first cytological data for B. dorsalis s.s. were reported Centromeres and pericentromeric regions along with
by Hunwattanakul and Baimai (1994) and Baimai et al. telomeres and subtelomeric ones have long been recog-
(1995). They described a total of six pairs of mitotic nized as dynamic regions of chromosome evolution due to
chromosomes, including a heteromorphic sex chromosome their repetitive nature and are considered as ‘hotspots for
pair; these data are consistent with our results. Four of the the insertion or retention of repeat sequences’ (for review
autosomes are submetacentric while one pair is metacen- see Eichler and Sankoff 2003). Detectable differences in
tric. They are labelled from II to VI based on their size and the amount and distribution of heterochromatin have been
arm ratio. The X chromosome is metacentric while the Y is observed in diverse eukaryotic genera, including Dipteran
a dot-like chromosome and totally heterochromatic. One genera such as Drosophila, Anopheles and Bactrocera. The
arm of the metacentric X chromosome is totally hetero- differences in the amount of pericentromeric heterochro-
chromatic which is in agreement with Baimai et al. (1995), matin of mitotic chromosomes among two Bactrocera
while the opposite arm could be characterised as mostly species complexes, B. dorsalis and B. tau (Walker), have
heterochromatic contrary to a ‘‘totally euchromatic’’ arm as been used as genetic markers for the identification of
described by Baimai et al. (1995). Evidence that most of cryptic species (Hunwattanakul and Baimai 1994; Baimai
the X chromosome is heterochromatic derives from dif- 1998; Baimai et al. 1995, 1999a, b, 2000).
ferences in the degree of Giemsa staining and chromatid Comparison of banding patterns between B. dorsalis s.s.
separation as compared to the autosomes (Fig. 1). This, and C. capitata revealed extensive similarities supporting
coupled with the absence of polytene elements corre- the proposed homology of the polytene chromosomes in
sponding to the sex chromosomes, further supports their these species. However, the 3R arm shows little chromo-
heterochromatic nature (see below). This is in full agree- somal banding pattern affinity between the two species,
ment with previously analysed Tephritid species where restricted only to the tips. The chromosomal rearrange-
both sex chromosomes are mostly heterochromatic and do ments observed so far between the two species involve
not form polytene elements (Bedo 1987; Zacharopoulou paracentric inversions, within-arm transpositions and only
1990; Mavragani-Tsipidou et al. 1992; Zhao et al. 1998; one pericentric inversion on chromosome 5. It should be
Kounatidis et al. 2008; Garcia-Martinez et al. 2009). emphasized that the specific pericentric inversion has been

123
Genetica (2011) 139:79–90 87

detected in all Bactrocera species analyzed so far (Zhao chromosomal inversions have been detected in another te-
et al. 1998) and B. cucurbitae (Zacharopoulou et al. man- phritid, Anastrepha fraterculus, which is supposed to be
uscript in preparation). These observations support Mul- composed of an unknown number of cryptic species (Cáceres
ler’s hypothesis (1940) that karyotype evolution in Diptera et al. 2009).
has involved mainly with within-arm rearrangements, such B. dorsalis chromosome inversions seem to be concen-
as paracentric inversions and transpositions and very few trated on the 4L and 2R chromosome arms (Supplementary
translocations and pericentric inversions. Material, ESM_4). However, we have indications that
The asynapsis observed in the proximal region (Sec- inversions also exist in most and possibly all chromosomes.
tions 73–74) of the 5R chromosome is interesting. It was Evidence for that may be the frequent presence of asy-
found in all nuclei of a significant number of chromosome naptic chromosomal regions, whole arm and/or partial
preparations of both strains. Asynapsis is frequently asynapsis and specific pairing configurations of several
observed in hybrid chromosomes of inter- or intra-specific regions. These phenomena were present in all nuclei of
crosses in Dipteran species [e.g. (Machado et al. 2006; particular preparations (data not shown). Further studies
Cáceres et al. 2009)] and in the presence of heterozygous are necessary, including the analysis of natural populations
chromosome rearrangements (Lefevre 1976). Kounatidis from different geographical regions, to clarify these data
et al. (2008) reported a high frequency of asynapsis dis- and estimate the frequency of the chromosome rearrange-
tributed over several chromosomal regions of R. cerasi in ments in the species.
four natural Greek populations. They suggested that short Chromosomal inversions were described in a variety of
deficiencies or insertions of genetic material in one of the species, including mammals, but most are known from
homologous chromosomes, undetectable by conventional Diptera such as fruit flies (e.g. Drosophila) and Anopheline
cytology, could explain this asynapsis. They also discussed mosquitoes. In many groups of animals and plants chro-
the possibility of gene transfer events between the Wol- mosomal inversions are found as fixed differences between
bachia and R. cerasi being associated with the asynaptic species and as polymorphisms within species. These dif-
phenomena. Recently, Dunning Hotopp et al. (2007) con- ferences have stimulated interest in the contribution of
firmed gene transfer events from Wolbachia bacteria to chromosomal rearrangements to speciation. In fact, for
genomes of four insects and four nematode species and in more than half a century they have been identified as being
some cases it was shown that the inserted genes were of great importance in adaptation and speciation (Dobz-
transcriptionally active. hansky 1970; Krimbas and Powell 1992; Coyne and Orr
In B. dorsalis polytene chromosomes, at least one 2004; Hoffman and Rieseberg 2008). Current data suggest
obvious deletion of a single band was detected (Supple- that inversions may contribute to species differentiation
mentary Material, ESM_5). In many other cases additional through the preservation of combination of alleles crucial
differences between the aligned homologous chromosomes to ecological adaptation by acting as suppressors of
are visible (Supplementary Material, ESM_5) that could recombination. This mechanism may facilitate divergence
either be due to undetected (by the current cytological among populations and eventually lead to species differ-
analysis) chromosomal rearrangements or to differences in entiation (Noor et al. 2001; 2007; Machado et al. 2002;
gene activity, i.e. differential puffing activity between the Feder et al. 2003; Navarro and Barton 2003; Ayala and
two homologous chromosomes. B. dorsalis was shown to Coluzzi 2005; Machado et al. 2007; Kulathinal et al. 2008;
be infected by Wolbachia strains (Jamnongluk et al. 2002). Costantini et al. 2009). Elucidation of the causes of chro-
Whether gene transfer events have occurred between mosomal inversions in natural populations will contribute
Wolbachia and B. dorsalis could be further investigated to a better understanding of their role in speciation pro-
and polytene chromosomes could facilitate such an cesses (Runcie and Noor 2009). Evidence currently sup-
analysis. ported by the availability of genome sequences in a number
The most interesting finding during the analysis of the of different taxa, suggests that transposable elements are
B. dorsalis s.s. polytene chromosomes is the detection of most likely associated with the generation of chromosomal
numerous chromosome inversions (Supplementary Mate- rearrangements (Lyttle and Haymer 1992; Cáceres et al.
rial, ESM_4). It should be emphasized that naturally occur- 1999; Mathiopoulos et al. 1999; Evgen’ev et al. 2000;
ring chromosome rearrangements were never observed in Cáceres et al. 2001; Richards et al. 2005), although an
B. oleae (Mavragani-Tsipidou et al. 1992; Mavragani–Tsi- alternative mechanism has been proposed (Ranz et al.
pidou unpublished data) and B. tryoni (Zhao et al. 1998), 2007). Transposable elements (TEs) are characterized as
neither in C. capitata (Zacharopoulou unpublished data). ‘powerful facilitators of genome evolution’, since they can
Especially in the case of C. capitata many different strains induce a great variety of genetic changes, leading thus to
and populations were analyzed and no chromosome rear- diversity [reviewed in Oliver and Greene (2009)]. In
rangements were observed. Contrary to the last species, accordance with the above suggestions, the presence of a

123
88 Genetica (2011) 139:79–90

possibly active transposable element (hopper) in B. dor- oriental fruit fly, Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel). Mol Ecol
salis (Handler 2003) could be correlated with the inver- 16:3522–3532
Armstrong KF, Cameron CM (2000) Species identification of
sions observed in the species. tephritids across a broad taxonomic range using ribosomal
Current evidence suggests that the B. dorsalis complex DNA. In: Tan KH (ed) Area-wide control of fruit flies and other
represents a rapidly evolving species complex (75 species insect pests. Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang,
have been described) and most of the species diversity has pp 703–710
Armstrong KF, Cameron CM, Frampton ER (1997) Fruit fly (Diptera:
been generated during the past 1–2 million years. The Tephritidae) species identification: a rapid molecular diagnostic
observed hybridization between morphologically defined technique for quarantine application. Bull Entomol Res 87:
species within this complex could be consistent with incip- 111–118
ient speciation in this complex, as observed in other species Ayala FJ, Coluzzi M (2005) Chromosome speciation: Humans,
Drosophila and mosquitoes. PNAS 102:6535–6542
(della Torre et al. 2001; Guelbeogo et al. 2005; Cáceres et al. Baimai V (1998) Heterochromatin accumulation and karyotypic
2009). All the above and our cytogenetic analysis suggest evolution in some dipteran insects. Zool Stud 37:75–88
that the B. dorsalis complex should be under species dif- Baimai V, Trinachartvanit W, Tigvattananont S, Grote PJ, Poramar-
ferentiation and, therefore, provide a useful model for the com R, Kijchalao U (1995) Metaphase karyotypes of fruit flies of
Thailand. I. Five sibling species of the Bactrocera dorsalis
study of evolutionary phenomena. Accumulation of molec- complex. Genome 38:1015–1022
ular and genetic data, which are in their infancy now, along Baimai V, Phinchongsakuldit J, Tigvattananont S (1999a) Metaphase
with cytogenetic analysis of natural populations of this karyotypes of fruit flies of Thailand. IV. Evidence for six new
complex, could provide tools towards this direction. species of the Bactrocera dorsalis complex. Cytologia 64:371–377
Baimai V, Phinchongsakuldit J, Trinachartvanit W (1999b) Meta-
phase karyotypes of fruit flies of Thailand (III). Six members of
the Bactrocera dorsalis complex. Zool Stud 38:110–118
Conclusion Baimai V, Sumrandee C, Tigvattananont S, Trinachartvanit W (2000)
Metaphase karyotypes of fruit flies of Thailand. V. Cytotaxon-
omy of ten additional new species of the Bactrocera dorsalis
The results of the current study show that B. dorsalis s.s. complex. Cytologia 65:409–417
polytene chromosomes of sufficient quality, suitable for Bedo DG (1987) Polytene chromosome mapping in Ceratitis capitata
cytogenetic analysis of the species, can be prepared from (Diptera: Tephritidae). Genome 29:598–611
larval salivary glands. Given that polytene chromosomes Cáceres M, Ranz JM, Barbadilla A, Long M, Ruiz A (1999) A
transposable element mediated the generation of a Drosophila
represent very important tools for the analysis of the widespread chromosomal inversion. Science 285:415–418
genetic organization of the chromosomes and the genome Cáceres M, Puig M, Ruiz A (2001) Molecular characterization of two
as a whole, their availability in B. dorsalis s.s. could (1) natural hotspots in the Drosophila buzzatii genome induced by
facilitate species identification within the B. dorsalis transposon insertions. Genome Res 11:1353–1364
Cáceres C, Segura DF, Vera MT, Wornoayporn W, Cladera JL, Teal
complex currently relying mainly on morphological char- P, Sapountzis P, Bourtzis K, Zacharopoulou A, Robinson AS
acters (2) clarify the phylogeny of Tephritids and (3) shed (2009) Incipient speciation revealed in Anastrepha fraterculus
light on the species differentiation in this complex. Finally, by studies on mating compatibility, sex pheromones, hybridisa-
polytene chromosome maps could also support the devel- tion and cytology. Biol J Linn Soc 97:152–165
Carson HL, Yoon JS (1982) Genetics and evolution of Hawaiian
opment of genetic control techniques and the genome- Drosophila. In: Ashburner M, Carson HL, Thompson JN Jr (eds)
mapping project of the species. The genetics and biology of Drosophila. Academic Press,
London, 3b, pp 296–344
Acknowledgments This work forms part of the Joint FAO/IAEA CDFA (California Department of Food and Agricutlure) (2008)
research programme for the development of improved control meth- Oriental fruit fly. Pest detection/Emergency projects branch.
odologies against fruit fly pest species. We would also like to thank http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/phpps/pdep/treatment/oriental_ff.html
the two anonymous reviewers for their significant comments on the Chen P, Ye H (2008) Relationship among five populations of
manuscript. Bactrocera dorsalis based on mitochondrial DNA sequences in
western Yunnan. China J Appl Entomol 132:530–537
Clarke AR, Armstrong KF, Carmichel AE, Milne JR, Raghu S,
Roderick GK, Yeates DK (2005) Invasive phytophagous pest
arising through a recent tropical evolutionary radiation: the
References Bactrocera dorsalis complex of fruit flies. Annu Rev Entomol
50:293–319
Adams MD, Celniker SE, Holt RA et al (2000) The genome sequence Coluzzi M, Sabatini A, Petrarca V, DiDeco MA (1979) Chromosomal
of Drosophila melanogaster. Science 287:2185–2195 differentiation and adaptation to human environments in the
Adsavakulchai A, Baimai V, Prachyabrued W, Grote PJ, Lertlum S Anopheles gambiae complex. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg
(1998) Morphometric study using wing image analysis for 73:483–497
identification of the Bactrocera dorsalis complex (Diptera: Costantini C, Ayala D, Guelbeogo WM, Pombi M, Some CY, Bassole
Tephritidae). WWW J Biol 3:34–43 IHN, Ose K, Fotsing J-M, Sagnon N, Fontenille D, Besansky NJ,
Aketarawong N, Bonizzoni M, Thanaphum S, Gomulski LM, Gasperi Simard F (2009) Living at the edge: biogeographic patterns of
G, Malacrida AR, Gugliemino CR (2007) Inferences on the habitat segregation conform to speciation by niche expansion in
population structure and colonization process of the invasive Anopheles gambiae. BMC Ecol 9:16

123
Genetica (2011) 139:79–90 89

Coyne JA, Orr HA (2004) Speciation. Sinauer Asociates, Sunderland Holt RA, Subramanian GM, Halpern A, Sutton GG et al (2002) The
MA genome sequence of the malaria mosquito Anopheles gambiae.
della Torre A, Fanello C, Akogbeto M, Dossou-yovo J, Favia G, Science 298:129–149
Petrarca V, Coluzzi M (2001) Molecular evidence of incipient Hunwattanakul N, Baimai V (1994) Mitotic karyotypes of four
speciation within Anopheles gambiae s.s. in West Africa. Insect species of fruit flies (Bactrocera) in Thailand. Kasetsart J (Nat
Mol Biol 10:9–18 Sci) 28:142–148
Dobzhansky TG (1970) Genetics of the evolutionary process. Jamnongluk W, Kittayapong P, Baimai V, O’Neill S (2002)
Columbia University Press, New York Wolbachia infections of Tephritid fruit flies: molecular evidence
Drew RAI (1989) The tropical fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae: for five distinct strains in a single host species. Curr Microb
Dacinae) of the Australasian and Oceanian regions. Mem Qld 45:255–260
Mus 26:521 Jamnongluk W, Baimai V, Kittayapong P (2003) Molecular evolution
Drew RAI, Hancock DL (1994) The Bactocera dorsalis complex of of tephritid fruit flies in the genus Bactrocera based on the
fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae: Dacinae) in Asia. Bull Entomol cytochrome oxidase I gene. Genetica 119:19–25
Res Suppl 2:1–68 Kounatidis I, Papadopoulos N, Bourtzis K, Mavragani-Tsipidou P
Drew RAI, Raghu S, Halcoop P (2008) Bridging the morphological (2008) Genetic and cytogenetic analysis of the fruit fly
and biological species concepts: studies on the Bactrocera Rhagoletis cerasi (Diptera: Tephritidae). Genome 51:479–491
dorsalis (Hendel) complex (Diptera: Tephritidae: Dacinae) in Krimbas CB, Powell JR (1992) Drosophila inversion polymorphism.
South-East Asia. Biol J Linn Soc 93:217–226 CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL., USA
Dunning Hotopp JC, Clark ME, Oliveira DCSG, Foster JM, Fisher P, Kulathinal RJ, Stevison LS, Noor MAF (2008) The genomics of
Muñoz Torres MC, Giebel JD, Kumar N, Ishmael N, Wang S, speciation in Drosophila: diversity, divergence, and introgres-
Ingram J, Nene RV, Shepard J, Tomkins J, Richards S, Spiro DJ, sion estimated using low-coverage genome sequencing. PLoS
Ghedin E, Slatko BE, Tettelin H, Werren JH (2007) Widespread Genet 5(7):e1000550
lateral gene transfer form intracellular bacteria to multicellular Lacovaara S, Saura A (1982) Evolution and speciation in the
eukaryotes. Science 317:1753–1756 Drosophila obscura group. In: Ashburner M, Carson HL,
Eichler EE, Sankoff F (2003) Structural dynamics of eukaryotic Thompson JN Jr (eds) The genetics and biology of Drosophila.
chromosome evolution. Science 301:793–797 Academic Press, London, 3b, pp 1–59
Evgen’ev MB, Zelentsova H, Poluectova H, Lyozin GT, Vel- Lawson AE, McQuire DJ, Yeates DH, Drew RAI, Clarke AR (2003)
eikodvorskaja V, Pyatkov KI, Zhivotovsky LA, Kidwell MG Dorsalis: an interactive identification tool to fruit flies of the
(2000) Mobile elements and chromosomal evolution in the virilis Bactrocera dorsalis complex. CDROM publication, Griffith
group of Drosophila. PNAS 97:11337–11342 Univ. Brisbane, Aust
Feder JL, Roethele JB, Filchak K, Niedbalski J, Romero-Severson J Lefevre G (1976) A photographic representation and interpretation of
(2003) Evidence for inversion polymorphism related to sympat- the polytene chromosomes of Drosophila melanogaster salivary
ric host race formation in the apple maggot fly, Rhagoletis glands. In: Ashburner M, Novitski E (eds) The genetics and
pomonella. Genetics 163(3):939–953 biology of Drosophila. Academic Press, London, 1a, pp 31–66
Follett PA, McQuate GT (2001) Accelerated development of Lemeunier F, David JR, Tsakas L, Ashburner M (1986) The
quarantine treatments for insects on poor hosts. J Econ Entomol melanogaster species group. In: Ashburner M, Carson HL,
94:1005–1011 Thopson JN (eds) The genetics and biology of Drosophila.
Franz G (2005) Genetic sexing strains in Mediterranean fruit fly, an Academic Press, London, 1e, pp 147–256
example for other species amenable to large-scale rearing for the Lyttle TW, Haymer DS (1992) The role of the transposable element
sterile insect technique. In: Dyck VA, Hendrichs J, Robinson AS hobo in the origin of endemic inversions in wild populations of
(eds) Sterile insect technique: principles and practice in area- Drosophila melanogaster. Genetica 86:113–126
wide integrated pest management. Springer, Dordrecht, The Machado CA, Kliman RM, Markert JA, Hey J (2002) Inferring the
Netherlands, pp 427–452 history of speciation from multilocus DNA sequence data: the
Garcia-Martinez V, Hernandez-Ortiz E, Zepeta-Cisneros CS, Robin- case of Drosophila pseudoobscura and close relatives. Mol Biol
son AS, Zacharopoulou A, Franz G (2009) Mitotic and polytene Evol 19:472–488
analysis in the Mexican fruit fly, Anastrepha ludens (Loew) Machado LPB, Madi-Ravazzi L, Tadei WJ (2006) Reproductive
(Diptera: Tephritidae). Genome 52:1–11 relationships and degree of synapsis in the polytene chromo-
Gariou-Papalexiou A, Gourzi P, Delprat A, Kritikou D, Rapti K, somes of the Drosophila buzzatti species cluster. Braz J Biol
Chrysanthakopoulou B, Mintzas A, Zacharopoulou A (2002) 66:279–293
Polytene chromosomes as tools in the genetic analysis of the Machado CA, Matzkin LM, Reed LK, Markow TA (2007) Multilocus
Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata. Genetica 116:59–71 nuclear sequences reveal intra- and interspecific relationships
Guelbeogo WM, Grushko O, Boccolini D, Ouédraogo PA, Besansky among chromosomally polymorphic species of cactophilic
NJ, Sagnon NF, Costantini C (2005) Chromosomal evidence of Drosophila. Mol Ecol 16:3009–3024
incipient speciation in the Afrotropical malaria mosquito Malavasi A, van Sauers-Muller A, Midgarden D, Kellman V, Didelot
Anopheles funestus. Med Vet Entomol 19:46–458 D, Caplong Ph, Ribeiro O (2000) Regional programme for the
Handler AM (2003) Isolation and analysis of a new hopper hAT eradication of the Carambola fruit fly in South America. In: Tan
transposon from the Bactrocera dorsalis white eye strain. KH (ed) Area-wide control of fruit flies and other insect pests.
Genetica 118:17–24 Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, pp 395–399
Handler AM, Gomez SP (1997) A new hobo, Ac, Tam3 transposable Mathiopoulos KD, della Torre A, Santolamazza F, Predazzi V,
element, hopper, from Bactrocera dorsalis is distantly related to Petrarca V, Coluzzi M (1999) Are chromosomal inversions
hobo and Ac. Gene 185:133–135 induced by transposable elements? A paradigm from the malaria
Hoffman AA, Rieseberg LH (2008) Revisiting the impact of mosquito Anopheles gambiae. Parassitol 41:106–129
inversions in evolution: from population genetic markers to Mau MFA (2007) Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel). Crop knowledge
drivers of adaptive shifts and speciation? Annu Rev Ecol Evol master. http://www.extento.hawaii.edu/Kbase/Crop/Type/
Syst 39:21–42 bactro_d.htm

123
90 Genetica (2011) 139:79–90

Mavragani-Tsipidou P, Karamanlidou G, Zacharopoulou A, Koliais D. persimilis genome sequences in relation to chromosomal

S, Kastritsis C (1992) Mitotic and polytene chromosome analysis inversions. Genetics 177:1417–1428
in Dacus oleae (Diptera: Tephritidae). Genome 35:373–378 Oliver KR, Greene WK (2009) Transposable elements: powerful
McCombs SD, Saul SH (1992) Linkage analysis of genetic markers in facilitators of evolution. Bioess 31:703–714
the oriental fruit fly. In: McPheron BA, Steck GJ (eds) Fruit fly Ranz JM, Maurin D, Chan YS, Von Grotthuss M, Hillier LW, Roote
pests: a world assessment and management. St. Lucie Press, Fl, J, Ashburner M, Bergman CM (2007) Principles of genome
pp 231–235 evolution in the Drosophila melanogaster species group. PLoS
McCombs SD, Saul SH (1995) Translocation based genetic sexing Biol 5e152:1369–1381
system for the oriental fruit fly (Diptera-Tephritidae) based on Richards S, Liu Y, Bettencourt BR, Hradecky P et al (2005)
pupal color dimorphism. Ann Entomol Soc Am 88:695–698 Comparative genome sequencing of Drosophila pseudoobscura:
McInnis DO, Rendon P, Jang E, van Sauers-Muller A, Sugayama R, chromosomal, gene, and cis-element evolution. Genome Res
Malavasi A (1999) Interspecific mating of introduced, sterile 15:1–18
Bactrocera dorsalis with wild B. carambolae (Diptera: Tephri- Robinson AS, Franz G, Fisher K (1999) Genetic sexing strains in the
tidae) in Suriname: a potential case for cross-species sterile medfly, Ceratitis capitata: development, mass rearing and field
insect technique. Ann Entomol Soc Am 92:758–765 application. Trends Entomol 2:81–104
Muller HJ (1940) Bearings of the Drosophila work on systematics. In: Runcie DE, Noor MAF (2009) Sequence signatures of a recent
Huxley JS (ed) The new systematics. Oxford University Press chromosomal rearrangement in Drosophila mojavensis. Genetica
(Clarendon), London and New York, pp 185–268 136:5–11
Muraji M, Nakahara S (2001) Phylogenetic relationships among fruit Seewootuthum SI, Permaloo S, Gungah B, Soonnoo AR, Alleck M
flies, Bactrocera (Diptera, Tephritidae), based on mitochondrial (2000) Eradication of an exotic fruit fly from Mauritius. In: Tan
rDNA sequences. Insect Mol Biol 10:549–559 KH (ed) Area-wide control of fruit flies and other insect pests.
Muraji M, Nakahara S (2002) Discrimination among pest species of Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, pp 389–394
Bactrocera (Diptera: Tephritidae) based on PCR-RFLP of the Selivon D, Perondini ALP (1997) Evaluation of techniques for C and
mitochondrial DNA. Appl Entomol Zool 37:437–446 ASG banding of the mitotic chromosomes of Anastrepha species
Naeole CKM, Haymer DS (2003) Use of oligonucleotide arrays for (Diptera: Tephritidae). Braz J Genet 20:651–653
molecular taxonomic studies of closely related species in the Tan KH (2000) Behaviour and chemical ecology of Bactrocera flies.
oriental fruit fly complex. Mol Ecol Notes 3:662–665 In: Tan KH (ed) Area-wide control of fruit flies and other insect
Nakahara S, Tsuchiya T, Sato M, Masaki M, Kaneda M (2000) pests. Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia, Pulau, Penang,
Research on infestation to many kinds of plants by the pests of pp 647–656
quarantine importance. Bactrocera dorsalis complex. Res Bull Wee SL, Tan KH (2005) Evidence of natural hybridization between
Plant Prot Serv Jpn 36:53–56 two sympatric sibling species of Bactrocera dorsalis complex
Nakahara S, Kato H, Kaneda M, Sugimoto T, Muraji M (2001) based on pheromone analysis. J Chem Ecol 31:845–858
Identification of Bactrocera dorsalis complex species (Diptera: White IM, Elson-Harris M (1992) Fruit flies of economic signifi-
Tephritidae) by PCR-RFLP analysis. II. A study of genetic cance: their identification and bionomics. CAB International,
variation in B. dorsalis complex (Philippines population) and Oxford, UK
B. dorsalis (Taiwan population). Res Bull Plant Prot Serv Jpn Yu DJ, Xu L, Nardi F, Li JG, Zhang RJ (2007) The complete
37:69–73 nucleotide sequence of the mitochondrial genome of the oriental
Nakahara S, Kobashigawa Y, Muraji M (2008) Genetic variation fruit fly, Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae). Gene 396:
among and within populations of the Oriental fruit fly, Bactro- 66–74
cera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae), detected by PCR-RFLP of Zacharopoulou A (1990) Polytene chromosome maps in the medfly
the mitochondrion control region. Appl Entomol Zool Ceratitis capitata. Genome 33:184–197
43:457–465 Zhao JT, Fommer M, Sved J, Zacharopoulou A (1998) Mitotic and
Navarro A, Barton NH (2003) Chromosomal speciation and molec- polytene chromosome analyses in the Queensland fruit fly,
ular divergence—accelerated evolution in rearranged chromo- Bactrocera tryoni (Diptera: Tephritidae). Genome 41:510–526
somes. Science 300:321–324 Zhimulev IF, Belyaeva ES, Semeshin VF, Koryakov DE, Demakov
Noor MAF, Gratos KL, Bertucci LA, Reiland J (2001) Chromosomal SA, Demakova OV, Pokholkova GV, Andreyeva EN (2004)
inversions and the reproductive isolation of species. PNAS Polytene chromosomes: 70 years of genetic research. Int Rev
98:12084–12088 Cytol 241:203–275
Noor MAF, Garfield DA, Schaeffer SW, Machado CA (2007)
Divergence between the Drosophila pseudoobscura and

123