Skip to main content
NCBI home page
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2021 Nov 18;16(11):e0257115. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0257115

Physical localization of 45S rDNA in Cymbopogon and the analysis of differential distribution of rDNA in homologous chromosomes of Cymbopogon winterianus

Shivangi Thakur 1,#, Upendra Kumar 2,#, Rashmi Malik 3, Darshana Bisht 1, Priyanka Balyan 4, Reyazul Rouf Mir 5, Sundip Kumar 1,*
Editor: Dengcai Liu6
PMCID: PMC8601443  PMID: 34793445

Abstract

Cymbopogon, commonly known as lemon grass, is one of the most important aromatic grasses having therapeutic and medicinal values. FISH signals on somatic chromosome spreads off Cymbopogon species indicated the localization of 45S rDNA on the terminal region of short arms of a chromosome pair. A considerable interspecific variation in the intensity of 45S rDNA hybridization signals was observed in the cultivars of Cymbopogon winterianus and Cymbopogon flexuosus. Furthermore, in all the varieties of C. winterianus namely Bio-13, Manjari and Medini, a differential distribution of 45S rDNA was observed in a heterologous pair of chromosomes 1. The development of C. winterianus var. Manjari through gamma radiation may be responsible for breakage of fragile rDNA site from one of the chromosomes of this heterologous chromosome pair. While, in other two varieties of C. winterianus (Bio-13 and Medini), this variability may be because of evolutionary speciation due to natural cross among two species of Cymbopogon which was fixed through clonal propagation. However, in both the situations these changes were fixed by vegetative method of propagation which is general mode of reproduction in the case of C. winterianus.

Introduction

Cymbopogon, commonly known as lemon grass, is one of the most important aromatic grasses belonging to family Poaceae with proven therapeutic and medicinal values. It is grown for commercial and industrial purposes in tropics and subtropics of Asia, America and Africa [1]. Industrial interest in citronella oils is due to extensive use of its various components as fragrance in perfumes, soaps, mosquito repellent and as flavour additives in food products. Cymbopogon species display wide variation in morphological attributes and essential oil composition at inter and intraspecific levels [2]. The first cytological study in Indian Cymbopogon to ascertain the chromosome number [3, 4] indicated the different ploidy levels in these genera varying from diploid (2n = 20) to tetraploid (2n = 40) and hexaploid (2n = 60). However, as per available reports in literature, the cytogenetic studies in this genus have been limited to chromosome count and preliminary karyotype description of the cultivated species. The characterization of Cymbopogon germplasm largely been done on phenotypic characteristics [5] and more recently on the basis of some molecular markers such as RAPD and SSR [6–8]. Analysing the genome organization of plants reveal evolutionary relationships of different genomes, which may also be useful for crop improvement. The ribosomal RNA genes represent two highly conserved tandemly arrayed gene families namely 45S rDNA and 5S rDNA which have been studied extensively in plant genomes. Because of the numerous copies of these highly conserved families of repeated sequences, their physical location on the chromosome can be easily visualized. The 45S rDNA sites in somatic chromosomes are most extensively utilized and widely documented chromosomal regions in eukaryotes through fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). The 45S rDNA family together with the intergenic spacer (IGS) is present as tandem arrays within the nucleolus organizer regions (NORs) of satellite chromosomes and also at other chromosomal sites where they may not be associated with NOR [9–11]. Length polymorphism of these repeat units has been reported in a wide range of plants and animals and are attributed to variation in number of sub-repeats that are found in IGS. The length of IGS and the chromosomal location of 45S rDNA genes are often characteristic of a species and were widely used to study the phylogenetic relationships of several plant species [12–15]. In view of the limited cytological reports on Cymbopogon, molecular cytogenetic studies for the identification of individual chromosomes are urgently needed in this important crop. Therefore, the present investigation was conducted using 45S rDNA as a probe to develop valuable FISH landmarks of somatic chromosomes of Cymbopogon which may be utilized in subsequent molecular cytogenetic studies to generate physical maps of Cymbopogon species.

Results

Karyotype analysis

All the four varieties studied during the present investigation were observed as diploid with chromosome number (2n = 20). Variety Bio-13 belonging to C. winterianus is one of the supreme significantly commercialized variety of Java Citronella grass. This variety of C. winterianus contain diploid chromosome complement as 2n = 20 with basic chromosome number x = 10 (Figs 1a, 1c and 2a). Arm ratios for the chromosomes of this species ranged from 1.05 to 3.37 (Fig 2a) and the range of chromosome lengths lies between 1.3 to 3.12 μm. Bio-13 observed to have 3 chromosomes in the range of 2.0 to 3.0 μm (3C) and rest of the seven chromosomes in the range of 1 to 2 μm (7D). As per the arm ratios of different chromosomes of this variety, 3 chromosomes were metacentric and 7 were sub-metacentric (Table 1).

Fig 1. Mitotic cells of variety Bio-13, Medini, Manjiri (C. winterianus) and Krishna (C. flexuosus) after fluorescence in situ hybridization with 45S rDNA (yellow/green) as FISH probe.

Fig 1

Open in a new tab

The chromosomes were counterstained with propidium iodide (red). (a and c) Somatic metaphase showing diploid chromosomes of Bio-13 (2n = 20) showing differential hybridization signals of 45S rDNA on a pair of somatic chromosomes. (b) Interphase nuclei of Bio-13 showing differential hybridization signals of 45S rDNA (d) Somatic metaphase showing diploid chromosomes of Manjari (2n = 20) showing differential hybridization signals of 45S rDNA on a pair of somatic chromosomes. (e) Somatic metaphase showing diploid chromosomes of Medini (2n = 20) showing differential hybridization signals of 45S rDNA on a pair of somatic chromosomes. (f) Somatic metaphase showing diploid chromosomes of Krishna (2n = 20) showing hybridization signals of 45S rDNA on a pair of somatic chromosomes. White bars on right side of every figure is equivalent to 1 μm.

Fig 2. Total length and arm ratio of chromosome.

Fig 2

Open in a new tab

Schematic representation of chromosome arranged in descending order of their length: a. Karyogram of Bio-13 (C. winterianus), b. Karyogram of Manjari (C. winterianus), c. Karyogram of Medini (C. winterianus), d. Karyogram of Krishna (C. flexuosus).

Table 1. Description of karyotyping in all the varieties.

Variety Number of cells studied Longest chromosome* (μm) Shortest chromosome* (μm) Arm ratio* rDNA length rDNA % No. of sub-metacentric chromosome (Sm) No. of metacentric chromosome (M) Range of length (Chromosomes)
2–3 μm 1–2 μm
Bio-13 40 3.12 1.30 1.05–3.37 0.28 29.48 7 3 3 7
0.92 10.01
Manjari 40 2.98 1.31 1.05–3.38 0.32 26.51 7 3 2 8
0.79 11.59
Medini 40 3.10 1.70 1.04–3.40 0.32 26.12 7 3 2 8
0.81 11.72
Krishna 40 2.30 1.48 1.07–2.22 0.74 32.88 5 5 6 4
0.75 33.28
Open in a new tab

*Note: Average values.

Manjari (C. winterianus) had showed its somatic chromosome complement as 2n = 20 (diploid) with basic chromosome number x = 10 (Fig 1d) similar to Bio-13. The arm ratios as well as range of chromosome lengths (Fig 2b) was almost equivalent to C. winterianus var. Bio-13. This variety is observed to have 2 chromosomes in the range of 2.0 to 3.0 μm (2 C chromosomes) and rest of the eight chromosomes ranged in 1.0 to 2.0 μm (8 D chromosomes). As per the arm ratios (Table 1) of different chromosomes of this variety, 3 chromosomes were metacentric and 7 were sub-metacentric.

Medini (C. winterinaus) is comparatively new variety than above two varieties of C. winterianus which is also classified under Java Citronella grass with 2n = 20 as its somatic chromosome complement (Fig 1e). Arm ratios for the chromosomes of this species ranged from 1.04 to 3.40 and the range of chromosome lengths lies between 1.70 to 3.10 μm (Fig 2c). The length of two chromosome ranged between 2.0 to 3.0 μm (2 C chromosomes) and other eight chromosomes were ranged in 1.0 to 2.0 μm (8 D chromosomes). As per the arm ratios of different chromosomes of this variety, 3 of them were characterized as metacentric whereas 7 of them were characterized as sub-metacentric (Table 1).

Krishna (C. flexuosus), also contains the somatic chromosome complement of 2n = 20 (Fig 1f). The arm ratios of the chromosomes of this species ranged from 1.07 to 2.22 and the range of chromosomes length lies between 1.48 to 2.30 μm (Fig 2d). This showed that C. flexuosus var. Krishna had slightly smaller chromosomes than C. winterianus. As per the arm ratios of different chromosomes of this variety, 5 of the chromosomes were metacentric and other 5 were sub-metacentric (Table 1).

Localization of 45S rDNA

Bio-13 (C. winterianus) had shown strong hybridization signal of 45S rDNA at the terminal ends of short arms of the longest heterologous pair of somatic chromosome complement. The differential signal intensity of 45S rDNA was observed in different stages like metaphase (Fig 1a and 1c) and interphase (Fig 1b). It was found that relative length of 45S rDNA hybridization signals were different on this particular chromosome pair. The data represented that 45S rDNA hybridization signals had covered 29.48% (0.29 μm) of whole chromosome while on another chromosome of this pair covered only 10.01% (0.28 μm). Interestingly, this difference in signal intensity of 45S rDNA hybridization signals on both the chromosomes of this heterologous pair confirmed differential copy number of 45S rDNA in this case.

Manjari (C. winterianus) had also shown strong hybridization signals of 45S rDNA at the terminal ends of short arms of longest heterologous pair of its chromosome complement (Fig 1d). Similar to the Bio-13, the differential signal intensity of 45S rDNA was observed in metaphase chromosomes of Manjari (Fig 1d). The relative length of 45S rDNA signal in one chromosome of the heterologous bivalent was 26.51% (0.79 μm), while the relative length of 45S rDNA in other chromosome of this pair was recorded 11.59% (0.32 μm) which is indicating the differential copy number of rDNA in both chromosomes of this heterologous chromosome pair.

Medini (C. winterianus) had shown to have strong hybridization signals of 45S rDNA at the terminal ends of short arms of longest heterologous pair of its chromosome complement (Fig 1e). Similar to the Bio-13 and Manjari, this variety of C. winterianus also showed differential signal intensity of 45S rDNA in metaphase chromosomes. The relative length of 45S rDNA signal in one chromosome of the heterologous bivalent was 26.12% (0.81 μm) while the relative length of 45S rDNA in other chromosome of this pair was recorded 11.72% (0.32 μm) which is indicating the differential copy number of rDNA in both chromosomes of this heterologous chromosome pair.

Krishna (C. flexuosus) had shown to have strong hybridization signals of 45S rDNA at the terminal ends of short arms of longest chromosome pair of its chromosome complement. However, in contrast to differential signal intensity of 45S rDNA shown in all the three varieties of C. winterianus, this species had shown to have the 45S rDNA signals of similar intensity i.e., 32.60% and 33.18% on both chromosomes of longest homologous chromosome pair (Fig 1f).

Discussion

The observed results on chromosome length and arm ratios for chromosome of C. winterianus (Fig 2) were found to be in almost accordance with previous karyomorphological observation [16]. As per the arm ratios of different chromosomes of all the genotypes of C. winterianus, 3 chromosomes are metacentric and 7 are sub-metacentric. These results are in contrast to the previous investigation [16] where C. winterianus was reported to have 8 sub-metacentric and 2 metacentric chromosomes. This difference may be due to small size of the chromosomes as sometimes it may be difficult to identify the centromeric position of the chromosomes. However, during the present investigation we have recorded the data on several cells and the data were based on average length and hence seems to be more authentic. The slight variation observed in the karyotypes of C. winterianus may be due to phenomenon of differential chromatin condensation in different chromosomes. Although, lemon grass variety Krishna (C. flexuosus) has shown its somatic complement as 2n = 20 with basic chromosome number x = 10 (Figs 1f and 2d) similar to other species of Cymbopogon but slight variation is noted in average chromosome ratio of C. flexuosus (1.95) than earlier reports [14] of arm ratios (1.53).

In the past few decades, the extensive study of many plant species for localization of 45S rDNA genes have been done through FISH technique and it has been observed that, most of diploid plants have two sites rDNA i.e., a single locus [17]. Even though, some diploids exist with numerous sites of rDNA. The rDNA copy number changes rapidly and frequently, triggering relocation or deletion of some loci over and above the reduction in copy number below the detection sensitivity limit or mapping resolution [18, 19]. For the justification of these differences some mechanisms have been proposed by various workers, such as various chromosome rearrangements, unequal crossing-over, gene transposition (gene mobility), and conversion [19–21]. There is certain proof that rDNA sites may alter chromosomal position, lacking the contribution of translocations [20], mobile rDNA tandem repeats with different molecular mechanisms [22, 23] which also includes triggering by En/Spm transposons [19, 22, 24, 25]. Examples for arithmetical changes in 45S rDNA sites were described for few additional species, like in the colchicine-induced auto tetraploid Arabidopsis thaliana [26], signifying the 45S rDNA-bearing chromosome reorganization, as an entity of intragenomic translocation, and in tetraploid Centaurea jacea [27] in which the deletion of one pair of 45S rDNA loci was observed. Unluckily, there was lack of concrete evidence about mechanism involved in rDNA loci variation, so further studies need to be done in order to find the reasons behind the variation in pattern of rDNA loci.

The observations recorded during the present investigation are slightly different as the polymorphism has been observed within the same loci which exist at the short arms of two chromosomes of a homologous pair which seems like a rare observation, ‘as it is well known fact that in case of variation in rDNA present in two chromosomes of a homologous pair it will be equilibrated by subsequent round of crossing over and recombination in next generations. Krishna is a variety of C. flexuosus which is developed from variety Pragati and Cauveri (C. flexuosus) through phenotypic recurrent selection programme [28]. The crosses led to homogenization of genes through recombination and crossing over hence there is no polymorphism in rDNA sites (Figs 1f and 2d) on both the homologous chromosomes and thus the intensity of rDNA hybridization signals remain similar in both chromosomes. However, Bio-13 (C. winterianus) was developed through mutation breeding. Manjari was developed by irradiation of the slips of variety Manjusha with gamma rays and Medini was developed by clonal selection of some of the well performing commercial varieties of C. winterianus. These facts prompted us to explore the possibilities for differential distribution of 45S rDNA in both chromosomes of a homologous chromosome pair existed in the above-mentioned varieties of C. winterianus.

Java citronella, i.e., C. winterianus flowers copiously in South India and at higher attitudes in the hills of North Eastern India. However, due to irregularities in meiosis and chromosome polyploidy, viable seeds are not formed and therefore, the species can be propagated only by vegetative means. As per perusal of different literature we come across the fact that heterochromatin sites are fragile in nature and are prone to degeneration upon the exposure of physical and chemical mutagens. Considering the importance of these species there are several programmes running in different institutions to increase quantity and quality aspect. The development of C. winterianus var. Manjari through gamma radiation may be responsible for breakage of fragile rDNA site from the chromosome or this variability may be due to evolutionary speciation due to natural cross among two different species of Cymbopogon which is fixed due to clonal propagation (Fig 3). However, in both the situations these changes were fixed by vegetative method of propagation which is general mode of reproduction in the case of C. winterianus. Thus, the varieties of C. winterianus never got chance to recover by chromosome homogenization. This may be the reason why the change got fixed in cells of these varieties of C. winterianus. This explanation was also found to be apt for the variety Medini of C. winterianus which is developed through clonal selection from Manjari and having the same background. The C. winterianus var. Bio-13 is developed by in vitro somaclonal selection [29]. However, seed setting in C. flexuosus var. Krishna takes place in all regions of India, and hence developed through cross pollination and recurrent selection. In addition to vegetative propagation, it is also being propagated through seeds, hence there is equal opportunity of chromosomal recovery in each generation.

Fig 3. Evolutionary speciation in C. winterianus.

Fig 3

Open in a new tab

Material and methods

Plant materials

Four varieties of two Cymbopogon species namely C. winterianus (Medini, Manjari, Bio-13) and C. flexuosus (Krishna) were collected from Central Institute of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants (CIMAP), Research Centre, Pantnagar, Uttarakhand, India. The information concerning the details of cultivars, chromosome number and percentage listed in Table 2.

Table 2. Chromosome number and parentage of Cymbopogon species used in the present study.

Species Varieties Chromosome number Parentage/Development
C. flexuosus Krishna 20 Phenotypic recurrent selection [28]
C. winterianus Manjari 20 Induced Mutagenesis [32]
Medini 20 Clonal selection [33]
Bio-13 20 In vitro somaclonal selection [29]
Open in a new tab

Preparation of chromosome spreads

The procedure of mitotic chromosome preparation was basically the same as published protocols [29] with some modifications. The slips of these cultivars were covered with moist paper and kept in a tray for root initiation in dark under room temperature for 68–72 hr. Lateral roots of about 1 cm were pre-treated in 0.002 mol/L 8-hydroxyquinoline at room temperature for 2 h, then fixed in 3:1 Carnoy’s fixative solution for at least 1 day. To obtain the chromosome preparations, fixed root tips were digested with enzyme mixtures, containing 4% cellulose Onozuka R-10 (Merck, http://www.merck-chemicals.com) and 2.0% pectinase (Sigma-Aldrich, http://www.sigmaaldrich.com) in 1X PBS buffer, pH 5.5, at 37°C for 50 min. The enzyme solution was replaced by deionized water and kept on ice for at least 8 min. Following, the digested root tips were fixed in 3:1 Carnoy’s fixative. The slides were obtained using a “flame-dried” method, according to the published protocol [30].

Probe preparation

Plasmid pTa71 with a size 9.0 kb from wheat [31] was used for 45S rDNA sites. rDNA was labelled with Fluorescein-12-dUTP (ROCHE Diagnostics) using the nick translation method.

Signal detection and analysis

A 30 μl of hybridization mixture contained 15 μl of deionized formamide, 3 μl of 20X SSC, 6μl of 50% dextran sulphate, 1 μl of Salmon sperm DNA, 2 μl of probe DNA and 3 μl of ddH2O was added to denatured slide and covered with plastic coverslip. The slides were then incubated at 37º C in moist chamber overnight for hybridization of labelled probe with target DNA. After overnight incubation, slides were washed three times in 2X SSC for 5 min, 50% formamide in 2X SSC for 10 min and three times with 2X SSC for 5 min each at 42º C in water bath. This was followed by subsequent washing in 1X SSC for 5 min at RT. The slides were counterstained with propidium iodide and mounted with single drop of anti-fade mounting medium (Vectashield) and covered with 22×30 mm coverslips.

Photographs of cells were captured with well spread chromosomes by epifluorescence Zeiss Axioimager MI microscope (Carl Zeiss, Germany). The mean length of each chromosome, chromosome length, long arm, short arm and arm ratio of each chromosome and percentage of 45S rDNA signals were obtained through measurements with MicroMeasure 3.3 software (http://www.colostate.edu/Depts/Biology/ MicroMeasure). The karyograms were developed using above parameters obtained through MicroMeasure 3.3.

Acknowledgments

The author acknowledged the support of Central Institute of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants (CIMAP), Research Centre, Pantnagar, Uttarakhand, India for providing the germplasm. The research was performed at Molecular Cytogenetics Laboratory, Department of Molecular Biology & Genetic Engineering, College of Basic Sciences & Humanities, G. B. Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Pantnagar, Uttarakhand.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Shasany A K, Lal RK, Darokar MP, Patra NK, Garg A, Kumar S, et al. Phenotypic and RAPD diversity among Cymbopogon winterianus Jowitt accessions in relation to Cymbopogon nardus Rendle. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 2000; 47(5): 553–9. doi: 10.1023/A:1008712604390 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Rao BL. Scope for development of new cultivars of Cymbopogon as a source of terpene chemicals. In: Handa SS, Kaul MK, editors. Supplement to cultivation and utilization of aromatic plants. National Institute of Science Communication, Dr. KS. Krishnan Marg, New Delhi, India; 1997.p. 71–83. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Babu CN. Chromosome numbers in Cymbopogon species. Current Science 1936; 4(10): 739–40. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Bor NR. The genus Cymbopogon Spreng. In India Burma and Ceylon Part I. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 1953; 51: 890–916. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Sangwan NS, Yadav U, Sangwan RS. Molecular analysis of genetic diversity in elite Indian cultivars of essential oil trade types of aromatic grasses (Cymbopogon species). Plant Cell Reports 2001; 20(5): 437–44. doi: 10.1007/s002990100324 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Kumar J, Verma V, Goyal A, Shahil AK, Sparoo R, Sangwan RS, et al. Genetic diversity analysis in Cymbopogon species using DNA markers. Plant Omics Journal 2009; 2(1): 20–9. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Kumar J, Verma V, Shahi AK, Qazi GN, Balyan HS. Development of simple sequence repeats markers in Cymbopogon species. Planta Medica 2007; 73:262–66. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-967121 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Kumar J, Verma V, Qazi GN, Gipta PK. Genetic diversity in Cymbopogon species using PCR based functional markers. 2007; 16(2):199–22. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Mukai Y, Endo TR, Gill BS. Physical mapping of the 18S-26S rRNA multigene family in common wheat: identification of a new locus. Heredity 1991; 100(2):71–8 doi: 10.1007/bf00418239 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Leitch IJ, Heslop-Harison JS. Physical mapping of the 18S– 5.8S–26S rDNA genes in barley by in situ hybridization. Genome 1992; 35(6): 1013–18. doi: 10.1139/g92-155 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Pedersen C, Linde-Laursen I. Chromosome location of four minor rDNA loci and marker microsatellite sequence in barley. Chromosome 1994; 2(1): 65–71. doi: 10.1007/bf01539456 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Badaeva ED, Bernd F, Gill BS. Genome differentiation in Aegilops. Physical mapping of 5S and 18S-26S ribosomal RNA gene families in diploid species. Genome 1996; 39(6): 1150–58 doi: 10.1139/g96-145 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Raina SN, Mukai Y. Detection of a variable number of 18S–5.8S–26S and 5S ribosomal DNA loci by fluorescence in situ hybridization in diploid and tetraploid Arachis species. Genome 1999; 42(1): 52–59. doi: 10.1139/g98-092 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Ansari HA, Ellison NW, Reader MS, Badaeva ED, Friebe B, Miller TE, et al. Molecular Cytogenetic Organization of 5S and 18S-26S rDNA Loci in White Clover (Trifolium repens L.) and Related Species. Annals of Botany 1999; 83(3): 199–206 doi: 10.1006/anbo.1998.0806 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Taketa S, Ando H, Takeda K, Bothmer VR. Physical locations of 5S and 18S–25S rDNA in Asian and American diploid Hordeum species with the I genome. Heredity 2001; 86(5): 522–30 doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2540.2001.00768.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Lavania UC. Karyomorphological observations in Cymbopogon Sprengel. Cytologia 1988; 53(3): 517–24. doi: 10.1508/cytologia.53.517 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Mishima M, Ohmido N, Fukui K, Yahara T. Trends in site number change of rDNA loci during polyploid evolution in Sanguisorba (Rosaceae). Chromosoma 2002; 110(8): 550–8. doi: 10.1007/s00412-001-0175-z [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Jiang J, Gill BS. New 18S.26S ribosomal RNA gene loci: chromosomal landmarks for the evolution of polyploidy wheats. Chromosoma 1994; 103(3):179–185. doi: 10.1007/BF00368010 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Raskina O, Belyayev A. and Nevo E. Activity of the En/Spm-like transposons in meiosis as a base for chromosome re-patterning in a small, isolated, peripheral population of Aegilops speltoides Tausch. Chromosome Research 2004; 12(2): 153–61. doi: 10.1023/b:chro.0000013168.61359.43 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Schubert I, Wobus U. In situ hybridization confirms jumping nucleolus organizing regions in Allium. Chromosoma 1985; 92(2): 143–48. doi: 10.1007/bf00328466 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Dubcovsky J, Dvorak J. Ribosomal RNA multigene loci: nomads of the Triticeae genomes. Genetics 1995; 140(4): 1367–77. doi: 10.1093/genetics/140.4.1367 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Thomas HM, Harper JA, Morgan WG. Gross chromosome rearrangements are occurring in an accession of the grass Lolium rigidum. Chromosome Research 2001; 9 (7): 585–90 doi: 10.1023/a:1012499303514 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Datson PM, Murray BG. Ribosomal DNA locus evolution in Nemesia: transposition rather than structural rearrangement as the key mechanism. Chromosome Research 2006; 14(8): 845–857. doi: 10.1007/s10577-006-1092-z [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Pedrosa-Harand A, De Almeida CCS, Mosiolek M, Blair MW, Schweizer D, Guerra M. Extensive ribosomal DNA amplification during Andean common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) evolution. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 2006; 112 (5): 924–33. doi: 10.1007/s00122-005-0196-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Frello S, Heslop-Harrison JS. Chromosomal variation in Crocus vernus Hill (Iridaceae) investigated by in situ hybridization of rDNA and a tandemly repeated sequence. Annals of Botany 2000; 86(2): 317–22. doi: 10.1006/anbo.2000.1189 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Raskina O, Belyayev A, Nevo E. Quantum speciation in Aegilops: Molecular cytogenetic evidence from rDNA cluster variability in natural populations. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences of the USA 2004; 101(41): 14818–14823. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0405817101 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Weiss H, Maluszynska J. Chromosomal rearrangement in autotetraploid plants of Arabidopsis thaliana. Hereditas 2000; 133(3): 255–61. doi: 10.1111/j.1601-5223.2000.00255.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Dydak M, Kolano B, Nowak T, Siwinska D, Maluszynska J. Cytogenetic studies of three European species of Centaurea L. (Asteraceae). Hereditas 2009; 146 (4): 152–61. doi: 10.1111/j.1601-5223.2009.02113.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Improved Clonal variety Krishna of lemongrass developed. CIMAP Newsletter 1997; 24: 2–3. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Patra NK, Kumar B. Improved Varieties and Genetic Research in Medicinal and Aromatic Plants (MAPs). In: Proceedings of Second National Interactive Meet (NIM) on Medicinal and Aromatic Plants, Lucknow, India 2005; 53–61.
  • 31.Iovene M, Wielgus SM, Simon PW, Buell CR, Jiang JM. Chromatin structure and physical mapping of chromosome 6 of potato and comparative analysis with tomato. Genetics 2008; 180(3): 1307–17. doi: 10.1534/genetics.108.093179 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Gerlach WN, Bedbrook JR. Cloning and characterization of ribosomal RNA genes from wheat and barley. Nucleic Acids Res 1979; 7(7): 1869–85. doi: 10.1093/nar/7.7.1869 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Lal RK, Sharma JR, Misra HO. Development of new variety Manjari of Citronella Java (C. winterianus). Journal of Medicinal and Aromatic Plant Science 1999; 21: 727–29. [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Dengcai Liu

20 Sep 2021

PONE-D-21-26873Physical localization of 45S rDNA in Cymbopogon and the analysis of differential distribution of rDNA in homologous chromosomes of Cymbopogon winterianus.PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. KUMAR,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Nov 04 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Dengcai Liu, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We suggest you thoroughly copyedit your manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. If you do not know anyone who can help you do this, you may wish to consider employing a professional scientific editing service. 

Whilst you may use any professional scientific editing service of your choice, PLOS has partnered with both American Journal Experts (AJE) and Editage to provide discounted services to PLOS authors. Both organizations have experience helping authors meet PLOS guidelines and can provide language editing, translation, manuscript formatting, and figure formatting to ensure your manuscript meets our submission guidelines. To take advantage of our partnership with AJE, visit the AJE website (http://learn.aje.com/plos/) for a 15% discount off AJE services. To take advantage of our partnership with Editage, visit the Editage website (www.editage.com) and enter referral code PLOSEDIT for a 15% discount off Editage services. If the PLOS editorial team finds any language issues in text that either AJE or Editage has edited, the service provider will re-edit the text for free.

Upon resubmission, please provide the following:

● The name of the colleague or the details of the professional service that edited your manuscript

● A copy of your manuscript showing your changes by either highlighting them or using track changes (uploaded as a *supporting information* file)

● A clean copy of the edited manuscript (uploaded as the new *manuscript* file)

3. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

4. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: N/A

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The karyotypes of Cymbopogon species were constructed based on arm ratios and the physical localization of 45S rDNA in Cymbopogon was also determined. The research content of this article is too simple. Although the 45S rDNA was located on a pair of chromosomes and the signal diversity was observed, these results can not display the evolution of Cymbopogon species, because only four varieties were analyzed. The novelty and scientific significance of this manuscript are limited. Additionally, the authors didn't write the article carefully. For example, Table 2 can not be found in the main text. It was not indicated how many cells for each material were detected, and the statistical data was not listed.

Reviewer #2: The manuscript reported localization and genetic variation of 45S rDNA in representative Cymbopogon species. The study was clearly presented, with conclusions being supported by multiple evidence. The results were quite interesting for classification, genetic diversity and evolutionary studies of Cymbopogon.

This manuscript should be suitable for publication after replying below questions and considering minor revision.

1. The first time of scientific name for genus Cymbopogon, and after that, the Cymbopogon may be abbreviated by C. for all species in the genus, which may be checked overall manuscript.

2. The quality of “Figures” was well, however, the scale bar for the figures should be indicated.

3. For the chromosome lengths and strength of rDNA FISH signals in the species, the statistic number of cells may be mentioned for each samples of the species.

4. The second passage in “Discussion” will be condensed to present the knowledge closely associate to the present studies.

5. The citation style of “References” should be checked in detail.

Reviewer #3: The manuscript entitled “Physical localisation of 45S rDNA in Cymbopogon and the analysis of differential distribution of rDNA in homologous chromosome of Cymbopogon winterianus” by Thakur et al. is a very timely research article. The results are interesting with good merit. The authors provided new cytogenetic data for several cultivars of a Lemon grass/Cymbopogon. 45S rDNA sites which were used as probes for performing FISH analysis gave considerable interspecific variation in the intensity of 45S rDNA hybridization signals in both the cultivars. This helps in distinguishing somatic chromosomes clearly. Secondly, it yields information about differential distribution of 45S rDNA hybridization signals in heterologous chromosomes which further gave insight in evolutionary differences in different cultivars of the Cymbopogon. This shall provide immense helps in designing economic plant breeding strategies for this crop for further improvement. However, the manuscript needs following changes before recommending for the publication.

1. The language and readability of the manuscript needs some improvement.

2. Works have also be done earlier on molecular marker development and their use in diversity analysis in this species. It should be reviewed properly in introduction. For example, Kumar, J, Verma V, Qazi GN and Balyan HS (2007). Developments of simple sequence repeat markers in Cymbopogon species. Planta Medica 73: 262-266 Kumar J , Verma V, Qazi GN and Gupta PK (2007) Genetic diversity in Cymbopogon species using PCR-based functional markers. Journal of Plant Biochemistry and Biotechnology 16(2): 119-122

3. The presentation of data in figure needs improvement as they were overly stretched (Figure 1) and lacking scales.

4. The presentation of data in results section demands improvement

5. Like results section, the discussion section may be divided into different sub sections.

6. Line 105-111: Reframe the sentences.

7. Line 106, 113, 120: which indicated instead of which is indicating.

8. Line 133-137: Rephrase the sentence.

9. Line 145-150: Elaborate the sentence properly.

10. Line 148: Space between triggering and relocation.

11. Line 80-83: Rewrite the sentence.

12. There is repetition in line 81-82 and 88-89.

13. Line 145: the extensive studies instead of the extensive study.

14. Line 195-196: sounds incomplete, reframe it.

15. Line 214: space between 2 and %.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes: Jitendra Kumar

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2021 Nov 18;16(11):e0257115. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0257115.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0

6 Oct 2021

Point wise response to comments of the Reviewer#1

The karyotypes of Cymbopogon species were constructed based on arm ratios and the physical localization of 45S rDNA in Cymbopogon was also determined. The research content of this article is too simple. Although the 45S rDNA was located on a pair of chromosomes and the signal diversity was observed, these results cannot display the evolution of Cymbopogon species, because only four varieties were analyzed. The novelty and scientific significance of this manuscript are limited. Additionally, the authors didn't write the article carefully. For example, Table 2 cannot be found in the main text. It was not indicated how many cells for each material were detected, and the statistical data was not listed.

Response: Many thanks for spending quality time and reviewing our manuscript which helped to improve the overall quality of this manuscript. We have taken your comments into consideration while revising our manuscript. In response to your comments we would like to state that: (i) The research content although seems simple, but we were successful in deriving important information related to evolution of Cymbopogon species which can prove useful in developing advanced plant breeding programmes in future for this crop species. (ii) In response to your comment regarding the number of genotypes used, we would like to state that only four varieties of Cymbopogon are actually available in India. However, we would like to work on more varieties in near future if more genotypes will become available. (iii) The karyotyping and localization of 45S rDNA was carried out first time on this species. (iv) The whole manuscript has been thoroughly revised and changes have been made throughout the manuscript to increase its readability. The languages of the manuscript has been also improved. (v) We agree there was a typing mistake in citing Table #2. Table 2 was found in material and method section. (vi) The number of cells in each material is mentioned in Table 1.

Point wise response to comments of the Reviewer#2

Reviewer #2: The manuscript reported localization and genetic variation of 45S rDNA in representative Cymbopogon species. The study was clearly presented, with conclusions being supported by multiple evidence. The results were quite interesting for classification, genetic diversity and evolutionary studies of Cymbopogon.

This manuscript should be suitable for publication after replying below questions and considering minor revision.

Response: Many thanks for spending quality time, reviewing and appreciating our work.

1. The first time of scientific name for genus Cymbopogon, and after that, the Cymbopogon may be abbreviated by C. for all species in the genus, which may be checked overall manuscript.

Response: As desired, needful has been done.

2. The quality of ‘Figures’ was well, however, the scale bar for the figures should be indicated

Response: Needful has been done by providing scalebar for the figures.

3. For the chromosome lengths and strengths of rDNA FISH signals in the species, the statistic number of cells may be mentioned for each samples of the species.

Response: The number of cells studied for each species mentioned in Table 1.

4. The second passage in “Discussion” will be condensed to present the knowledge closely associate to the present studies.

Response: As desired, needful has been done.

5. The citation style of “References” should be checked in detail.

Response: As desired, needful has been done.

Point wise response to comments of the Reviewer#3

Reviewer #3: The manuscript entitled “Physical localisation of 45S rDNA in Cymbopogon and the analysis of differential distribution of rDNA in homologous chromosome of Cymbopogon winterianus” by Thakur et al. is a very timely research article. The results are interesting with good merit. The authors provided new cytogenetic data for several cultivars of a Lemon grass/Cymbopogon. 45S rDNA sites which were used as probes for performing FISH analysis gave considerable interspecific variation in the intensity of 45S rDNA hybridization signals in both the cultivars. This helps in distinguishing somatic chromosomes clearly. Secondly, it yields information about differential distribution of 45S rDNA hybridization signals in heterologous chromosomes which further gave insight in evolutionary differences in different cultivars of the Cymbopogon. This shall provide immense helps in designing economic plant breeding strategies for this crop for further improvement. However, the manuscript needs following changes before recommending for the publication.

Response: Many thanks for spending quality time and reviewing our manuscript. Many thanks also for appreciating our work.

1. The language and readability of the manuscript needs some improvement.

Response: The whole manuscript has been thoroughly revised and changes have been made throughout the manuscript. The languages and readability of the manuscript has been also improved.

2. Works have also be done earlier on molecular marker development and their use in diversity analysis in this species. It should be reviewed properly in introduction. For example, Kumar, J, Verma V, Qazi GN and Balyan HS (2007). Developments of simple sequence repeat markers in Cymbopogon species. Planta Medica 73: 262-266 Kumar J , Verma V, Qazi GN and Gupta PK (2007) Genetic diversity in Cymbopogon species using PCR-based functional markers. Journal of Plant Biochemistry and Biotechnology 16(2): 119-122.

Response: As desired, needful has been done

3. The presentation of data in figure needs improvement as they were overly stretched (Figure 1) and lacking scales.

Response: As desired, needful has been done.

4. The presentation of data in results section demands improvement

Response: As desired, needful has been done.

5. Like results section, the discussion section may be divided into different sub sections.

Response: It was not possible, although for perusal of the viewers, discussions was divided into different paragraphs.

6. Line 105-111: Reframe the sentences.

Response: As desired, needful has been done.

7. Line 106, 113, 120: which indicated instead of which is indicating.

Response: As desired, needful has been done.

8. Line 133-137: Rephrase the sentence.

Response: As desired, needful has been done.

9. Line 145-150: Elaborate the sentence properly.

Response: As desired, needful has been done.

10. Line 148: Space between triggering and relocation.

Response: As desired, needful has been done.

11. Line 80-83: Rewrite the sentence.

Response: As desired, needful has been done.

12. There is repetition in line 81-82 and 88-89.

Response: As desired, needful has been done.

13. Line 145: the extensive studies instead of the extensive study.

Response: As desired, needful has been done.

14. Line 195-196: sounds incomplete, reframe it.

Response: As desired, needful has been done.

15. Line 214: space between 2 and %.

Response: As desired, needful has been done.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Comments of All the Reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file. (22KB, docx)

Decision Letter 1

Dengcai Liu

8 Oct 2021

Physical localization of 45S rDNA in Cymbopogon and the analysis of differential distribution of rDNA in homologous chromosomes of Cymbopogon winterianus.

PONE-D-21-26873R1

Dear Dr. KUMAR,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Dengcai Liu, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Thank your improvement on the manuscirpt.

Acceptance letter

Dengcai Liu

14 Oct 2021

PONE-D-21-26873R1

Physical localization of 45S rDNA in Cymbopogon and the analysis of differential distribution of rDNA in homologous chromosomes of Cymbopogon winterianus

Dear Dr. Kumar:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Dengcai Liu

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Comments of All the Reviewers.docx

    Click here for additional data file. (22KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript.

    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES