Paramecium pp 271-281 | Cite as

Behavioral Genetics in P. caudatum

  • Mihoko Takahashi

Abstract

Since the extensive and classic work by Jennings (1906), Paramecium has been one of the favorite materials for the study of behavior in unicellular organisms and, among a few species of Paramecium, P. caudatum has been used in many studies that are important for understanding the physiological mechanisms of behavior. The electrophysiological methods including voltage clamping (Kamada 1934; Naitoh and Eckert 1968a, b, 1969, 1974; Eckert et al. 1976), demembranated modeling (Naitoh and Kaneko 1972), and deciliation and reciliation procedures (Dunlap 1976; Ogura and Takahashi 1976) were first developed in the study of P. caudatum. A new approach to understanding the mechanisms of behavior in Paramecium using P. tetraurelia was initiated by Kung (1971a, b) and has been adding more extensive information relating to the mechanism of behavior by using mutants (see Ramanathan et al., Chap. 15, this Vol.). P. tetraurelia is a very useful organism for genetic studies because it has autogamy. This makes the genetic work of P. tetraurelia easy as in haploid organisms. P. caudatum lacks autogamy, but this disadvantage has been overcome by developing techniques of artificial induction of autogamy (Tsukii and Hiwatashi 1979) or cytogamy (Takahashi and Shono 1980), and thus many behavioral mutants have been obtained (Takahashi 1979; Takahashi et al. 1985). These mutants have been used for genetic studies in P. caudatum as convenient genetic markers (Karino and Hiwatashi 1981; Tsukii and Hiwatashi 1983; Tsukii and Hiwatashi 1985).

Keywords

Adenosine Germinal Immobilization CaCl Barium 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Berger JD (1976) Gene expression and phenotypic change in Pammecium tetraurelia exconjugants. Genet Res Cambr 27:123–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cronkite DL (1976) A role of calcium ions in chemical induction of mating in Paramecium tetraurelia. J Protozool 23:431–433Google Scholar
  3. Dryl S (1961) The ciliary reversal in Paramecium caudatum induced by simultaneous action of barium and calcium ions. J Protozool 8:s55Google Scholar
  4. Dunlap K (1976) Ca channels in Paramecium confined to ciliary membrane. Am Zool 16:185Google Scholar
  5. Eckert R, Naitoh Y, Machemer H (1976) Calcium in the bioelectric and motor functions of Parmaecium. In: Duncan CJ (ed) Calcium in biological systems. Cambridge Univ Press, London, pp 233–255Google Scholar
  6. Endo H, Hiwatashi K (1981) Chemical induction of conjugation in K+-resistant mutants of Paramecium caudatum. Jpn J Genet 56:s591Google Scholar
  7. Haga N, Forte M, Saimi Y, Kung C (1982) Microinjection of cytoplasm as a test of complementation in Paramecium. J Cell Biol 82:559–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Haga N, Saimi Y, Takahashi M, Kung C (1983) Intra- and interspecific complementation of membrane-inexcitable mutants of Paramecium. J Cell Biol 97:378–382PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Haga N, Forte M, Ramanathan R, Hennessey T, Takahashi M, Kung C (1984) Characterization and purification of a soluble protein controlling Ca-channel activity in Paramecium. Cell 39:71–78PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hayashi M, Takahashi M (1979) Ciliary adenosine triphosphatase from a slow swimming mutant of Paramecium caudatum. J Biol Chem 254:11561–11565PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Hinrichsen RD, Saimi Y (1984) A mutation that alters properties of the calcium channel in Paramecium tetraurelia. J Physiol 351:397–410PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Hiwatashi K, Haga N, Takahashi M (1980) Restoration of membrane excitability in a behavioral mutant of Paramecium caudatum. J Cell Biol 84:476–480PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jennings HS (1906) Behavior of the lower organisms. Columbia Univ Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kamada T (1934) Some observations on potential differences across the ectoplasm membrane of Paramecium. J Exp Biol 11:94–102Google Scholar
  15. Karino S, Hiwatashi K (1981) Analysis of germinal aging in Paramecium caudatum by micronuclear transplantation. Exp Cell Res 136:407–415PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kung C (1971a) Genic mutants with altered system of excitation in Paramecium aurelia. I. Phenotypes of the behavioral mutants. Z Vergl Physiol 71:142–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kung C (1971b) Genic mutants with altered system of excitation in Paramecium aurelia. II. Mutagenesis, screening and genetic analysis of the mutants. Genetics 69:29–45Google Scholar
  18. Kung C, Eckert R (1972) Genetic modification of electric properties in an excitable membrane. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 69:93–97PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mikami K, Koizumi S (1979) Induction of autogamy by treatment with trypsin in Paramecium caudatum. J Cell Sci 35:177–184PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Miyake A (1968) Induction of conjugation by chemical agents in Paramecium. J Exp Zool 167:359–380PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Naitoh Y, Eckert R (1968a) Electrical properties of Paramecium caudatum modification by bound and free cations. Z Vergl Physiol 61:427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Naitoh Y, Eckert R (1968b) Electrical properties of Paramecium caudatum all-or-none electrogenesis. Z Vergl Physiol 61:453–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Naitoh Y, Eckert R (1969) Ionic mechanisms controlling behavioral responses in Paramecium to mechanical stimulation. Science 164:963–965PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Naitoh Y, Eckert R (1974) The control of ciliary activity in Protozoa. In: Sleigh MA (ed) Cilia and flagella. Academic Press. London New York, pp 305–352Google Scholar
  25. Naitoh Y, Kaneko H (1972) Reactivated Triton-extracted models of Paramecium modification of ciliary movement by calcium ions. Science 176:523–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ogura A, Takahashi K (1976) Artificial deciliation causes loss of calcium-dependent responses in Paramecium. Nature (London) 264:170–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Orias E, Hamilton HP, Flacks M (1979) Osmotic shock prevents nuclear exchange and produces whole-genome homozygotes in conjugating Tetrahymena. Science 203:660–663PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sato M, Hiwatashi K (1982) Genetic relationship between two mutants, cnrC and K+ resistant in Paramecium caudatum. Jpn J Genet 57:s702Google Scholar
  29. Shusterman CL, Thiede RW, Kung C (1978) K+-resistant mutants and “adaptation” in Paramecium. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 75:5645–5649PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Takahashi M (1979) Behavioral mutants in Paramecium caudatum. Genetics 91:393–408PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Takahashi M, Naitoh Y (1978) Behavioral mutants of Paramecium caudatum with the defective membrane electrogenesis. Nature (London) 271:656–659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Takahashi M, Shono M (1980) A new behavioural mutant in Paramecium caudatum isolation by artificial induction of cytogamy. Zool Mag (Tokyo) 89:s566Google Scholar
  33. Takahashi M, Haga N, Hennessey T, Hinrichsen RD, Hara R (1985) A gamma ray-induced non-excitable membrane mutant in Paramecium caudatum; a behavioral and genetic analysis. Genet Res Cambr 46:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tsukii Y, Hiwatashi K (1979) Artificial induction of autogamy in Paramecium caudatum. Genet Res Cambr 34:163–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tsukii Y, Hiwatashi K (1983) Genes controlling mating-type specificity in Paramecium caudatum three loci revealed by intersyngenic crosses. Genetics 104:41–62PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Tsukii Y, Hiwatashi K (1985) Meiotic nondisjunction and aneuploids in intersyngenic hybrids of Paramecium caudatum. Genetics 111:779–794PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Wichterman R (1986) The biology of Paramecium. Plenum, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mihoko Takahashi
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Biological SciencesUniversity of TsukubaIbarakiJapan

Personalised recommendations