Showing posts with label insect sex determination. Show all posts
Showing posts with label insect sex determination. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 13, 2015

Half Male, Half Female, Completely Weird

Biology concepts – sex determination system, gynandromorphs, non-disjunction, mitosis, bilateral symmetry, chimera, mosaicism



Ardhanarishvara is just form of the god Shiva.
As a male, he is considered the ultimate man,
James Garner mixed with a little Steve McQueen.
Parvati, his wife, wanted to share his experiences,
so he became half her. That’s one
progressive marriage.
In the Hindu faith, Shiva is the destroyer. Anything that has a beginning must have and end, so as Brahma made the world Shiva must destroy it so that it can be remade. On a more positive note, Shiva is also the god of change, making people better versions of themselves by destroying the ego and bad habits.

Shiva is male and celibate, although he has a female consort named Parvati (aka. Shakti, Devi, or Uma). There is also a deity called Ardhanarishvara, which is a half male/half female representation of Shiva + Parvati. The icon is found in most temples to Shiva, but this deity rarely has temples dedicated to him/herself.

Evolution chose to go the other way with nature. In more complex animals, the sexes are separated and join energies to reproduce. In biological terms, it’s a matter of increasing genetic diversity, the source of mutations and drift for natural selection.

However, like Ardhanarishvara, nature sometimes gives us a mixture; a normally two sex species will produce an individual that is part male and part female. And sometimes they're exactly half and half. This is going to take some explaining.

Every once in a while, some embryos have a mistake in mitosis. When the chromosomes line up for random assortment and portioning into the daughter cells, things can go wrong. Once in a while, two chromatids (the two copies of a replicated chromosome) may get pulled into the same daughter cell instead pulled apart with one going to each daughter (called a non-disjunction event).

This produces one cell with too many copies of that chromosome, and one cell with too few. Both outcomes can cause problems. Sometimes, the problem is just cosmetic; sometimes it’s deadly.


Gene loss can come from losing a part of one
chromosome, or you might lose the whole
chromosome (monosomy). It could occur from a
non-disjunction or from some toxic event. A 2015
study shows that smoking can cause a loss of the Y
chromosome in some cells. This makes men more
at risk for some cancers due to smoking (those
outside the lung).  Still want a cigarette?
On the other hand, on very rare occasions a chromosome will be lost during mitosis (chromosome loss event). It ends up next to that sock you can’t find in the washer. Who knows where it is – it just ain’t where it ought to be. One daughter cell has the right number of chromosomes and the other has one too few. Again, the consequences can range from small to really big.

A third possibility exists, where a mutation occurs in one chromatid after replication, so that even if the mitosis is normal (which it almost always is) one daughter will have a mutation (one normal and one mutated gene on the two chromosomes of the same type) and the other won’t (two normal genes on two normal chromosomes).

From then on, every time the daughter cells divide they increase the number of mutated and normal cells. The animal, if it survives to be born, will be a chimera (a mixture of two genotypes). The original chimera was a Greek mythical figure made from the parts of many animals and which breathed fire. It was a half-brother to the Hydra and Cerberus, the three-headed dog. Here it means something less menacing, but just as interesting.

Special circumstances can bring special kinds of chimeras. Which type is formed depends on when the mutation, non-disjunction, or chromosome loss occurs. In some animals, the first cell division after fertilization establishes right and left halves of the animal. Every progeny cell from one of the first daughters will be one side of the body, while every cell coming from the other original daughter will be on the other half of the animal.


The lobster on the top is a mosaic, the mutation
which changed the pigment occurred at a point when
some mutated and some non-mutated cells were on
each bilateral half of the embryo, so there are patches
of each. The bottom version had a mutation that
occurred precisely as the embryo was determining
right and left sides.
If the chromosome change or gene mutation occurs at this point, then exactly one half of the animal will have the change and the other half won’t. This is a bilateral chimera. On the other hand, of the mutation/change occurs at some other point, the there will be patches of one type of cell and patches of the other. This is called a mosaic (see picture to the right).

A 2013 review talks about mutations in different populations of cells and the right left isolation of some mutations. The authors point out that in bilateral chimeras, it is easy to study subtle effects of the gene mutation – one half displays the mutation, and the other half doesn’t. A single animal (could be a person) can serve as the experimental model AND  the control.

For example, in fruit flies (Drosophila melanogaster) the males are XY and the females are XX. If there was chromosome loss early in development, with a single X lost in one daughter cell, there will be XX daughter cells and X (called X0) daughter cells. X0 cells are male because the primary sex determining is located on the X chromosome. In this case just described, the XX cells are female and the X0 cells are male, in the same animal!

This animal would be a gynandromorph chimera. The word is very telling, since gyno = female and andro = male. This is different from a hermaphrodite. The hermaphroditic animal has two sets of genitalia, one female and one male (whether they work or not is another question). In a gynandromorph, the two cell populations of the entire animal show different sex chromosomes.


The patterning on the thorax and abdomen is a bit
hard to see, but the eyes are easily picked out on the
gynandromorphic fruit fly. The pigment genes are
on the sex chromosome.
Gynandromorphs are extremely rare. In fact, they have been demonstrated in only two groups, but this is preliminary. Remember how we talked about animal sexual dimorphism a few weeks ago? Well, it’s only in sexual dimorphic animal species that you would actually notice gynandromorphs (of course, there are exceptions).  

Birds and arthropods are the two animal groups where we have seen gynandromorphs. We gave the example of fruit flies above. You can check out the picture of one to the left. This is specific example of gynandromorph, a bilateral gynandromorph. The left side is female and the right half is male.

In different systems of embryonic development, chimeras can develop side to side (bilateral), front to back (polar), or corner to corner (oblique). This is if the mutation or change in chromosome or gene number takes place at exactly the right mitotic event that divides an animal. If it is any of the other time, the animal will be a mosaic.

In the bilateral gynandromorphic fruit fly above, the color of the eyes is different on each side, as is the body coloring and some other characteristics. This is because the secondary sex characteristics that determine sexual dimorphism are linked to the sex chromosomes.


Spiders have funky sex-determination systems, but
they can still have gynandromorphs. The coloring is
different, but there’s more. It is hard to see, but only
the male side (purplish) has the palp organ growing
on the second appendage for the transfer of
reproductive cells. Image via: spider silk stockings
But wait – normal male and female fruit flies both have red eyes. Here one is red but the other is white. That’s because the gene for eye color and body color pattern in fruit flies is carried on the X chromosome too. If the loss of a chromosome leaves that side of the body with only one X (XO male) and the X it has carries the recessive white eye color gene, then that eye will be white. The other half (XX female) might have dominant red and recessive white eye genes on its two X chromosomes, so that eye would be red.

Is a bilateral difference in coloration enough to call an animal bilaterally asymmetric? They are phenotypically (how they look outwardly) asymmetric, but you cut them in half the silhouettes would be exactly the same (body plan is still symmetric). You can argue amongst yourselves as to what makes an animal bilaterally asymmetric.

Gynandromorphs in vertebrates are extremely rare. The reason for this is that sex characteristics aren’t only controlled by genes on the sex chromosomes. They are also under the control of hormones. But gynandromorphy does occur in birds – they’re vertebrates, but different somehow. No one is quite sure why gynandromorphs are possible for them.

It could be that the mistake comes when multiple male reproductive cells are successful in fertilizing one egg cell. When the fertilized egg cell divides, the daughters would probably be asymmetric with respect to sex chromosomes. Since the sex chromosomes control the production of the reproductive organs, and those organs then make the hormones, you can see how the two are linked.


The gynandromorphic chicken on the left is more a
mosaic than completely bilateral. The male side (your
right) has bigger breast muscle, leg spur, bigger wattle
and white feathers (see the sporadic darker feathers –
it’s a mosaic). A 2010 study showed that if you
transplanted male cells on to the female side, they
retained their secondary sex characteristics –hormones
ain’t everything. The cardinal on the right is striking –
the perfect Ball State University mascot.
The key is in determining which of the sexually dimorphic traits are under strictly genetic control and which are under hormonal control. A study in a gynandromorphic finch in 2003 showed that not everything is hormones. The brains of the males and females are different (in part this determines the song the bird sings) and gynandromorphic finches have brains that are half male and half female in structure. Even with hormones that circulate throughout the body, the brains are still different. The finch of the study sang a male song and mated with a female (no offspring). The male behaviors were controlled by the male part of the brain.

A very rare gynandromorphic cardinal was spotted and subsequently studied for 40 days from afar. The paper reporting this study stated that the bird never sang, never drew the attention of other birds, and never mated. It was a complete loner. But could he/she mate?

Most female birds have one horn of the uterus (left side) that is functional while the other is small and nonfunctional (makes them lighter for flight). Male birds usually have one long testis that is functional, the right one. Since neither male or female birds (most of them) have external reproductive organs, then a gynandromorph bird where the left half is female and the right half is male might actually have a shot at being fertile. It would all depend on how the hormone battle played out.

However, gynandromorphs in mammals don’t happen. The sex hormones control too much of the systems and flow throughout entire body, so you can’t really keep secondary sex characteristics limited to a geographically determined set of cells, even if the sex chromosomes are different in the cells.


Butterflies show sexual dichromatism (different colors
in males and females) and well as different morphologies
of wing (shapes), The gynandromorphs display both, so
they are truly bilaterally asymmetric. Butterflies have an
XX and XY (XO) sex determination system like fruitflies,
except here the XX’s are male.
But there are some characteristics that are hormone independent. Some sex characteristics are set BEFORE the sex determining genes on the sex chromosomes are turned on (reviewed here). The sex characteristic is a default, and therefore is seen both males and females despite later hormone differences. That’s why men have nipples. Nippled is the default state, no nipples isn’t possible. And three nipples is just weird.

The example I like to give for the bilateral gynandromorphy that shows true bilateral asymmetry is butterflies. The male and female often have different coloration and wing shape. This makes them sexually dichromatic within one animal but also bilaterally asymmetric.

Next week we’ll back to the butterflies and asymmetry. There’s one butterfly who is attractive to the girls precisely because he’s asymmetric.



Renfree, M., Chew, K., & Shaw, G. (2014). Hormone-Independent Pathways of Sexual Differentiation Sexual Development, 8 (5), 327-336 DOI: 10.1159/000358447

Dumanski, J., Rasi, C., Lonn, M., Davies, H., Ingelsson, M., Giedraitis, V., Lannfelt, L., Magnusson, P., Lindgren, C., Morris, A., Cesarini, D., Johannesson, M., Tiensuu Janson, E., Lind, L., Pedersen, N., Ingelsson, E., & Forsberg, L. (2014). Smoking is associated with mosaic loss of chromosome Y Science, 347 (6217), 81-83 DOI: 10.1126/science.1262092

Zhao, D., McBride, D., Nandi, S., McQueen, H., McGrew, M., Hocking, P., Lewis, P., Sang, H., & Clinton, M. (2010). Somatic sex identity is cell autonomous in the chicken Nature, 464 (7286), 237-242 DOI: 10.1038/nature08852

Peer, B., & Motz, R. (2014). Observations of a Bilateral Gynandromorph Northern Cardinal ( ) The Wilson Journal of Ornithology, 126 (4), 778-781 DOI: 10.1676/14-025.1

Ma, K. (2013). Embryonic left-right separation mechanism allows confinement of mutation-induced phenotypes to one lateral body half of bilaterians American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A, 161 (12), 3095-3114 DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.36188




For more information or classroom activities, see:

Sex-determination system –

Gynandromorphy -



Wednesday, February 13, 2013

Just Leave The “Father” Line Blank

Biology concepts – apomixis, automixis, genomic imprinting, haplodiploid, facultative and obligate parthenogenesis

Kids questions can be exasperating, exhilarating,
and problematic –all at the same time. Questions
about biology are especially difficult because you
never know how much information to give at what
age. My advice – give the simplest answer that will
stimulate additional questions. Too much detail can
be a turn off to a kid and can lead you into subjects
that you aren’t ready to tackle with them. If you don’t
know the answer – find it out. Your kids should see
you demonstrate looking for an answer and learning.
“Mommy, why is the sky blue? Daddy, if atoms are mostly empty space, then why are objects solid?” These are questions with which every parent must deal. Unless you are familiar with Raleigh scattering or the quantum structure of the atom, you’re going to have to make something up. Use big words – it will confuse them into moving on to something else, and you get to look like you know something.

Parthenogenesis is a subject that baffles a lot of people for a lot of reasons, mostly because we know little about it yet. What has science’s response been to this lack of knowledge – give everything a new name and bury people in mountains of terminology. Jargon is job security after all.

Last week we saw that parthenogenesis, while an exception, is not as rare as we once thought. Now let’s take some time to get down and dirty and look at the in and outs of abandoning sex. We’ll use examples to keep the vocabulary monster at bay.

The whole point of parthenogenesis is to make an unfertilized egg develop into a whole organism. How can an egg develop on it own? In general, haploid eggs are useless (exception alert!) so moms need to construct a diploid or polyploid egg in order for parthenogenesis to have a chance.

One way is for mom to forego meiosis and produce diploid eggs. The term for this is apomixis (apo = free from, and mixis = mixing). It basically means "with no mixing of chromosomes;" neither by homologous recombination nor by random assortment in meiosis. Therefore, offspring produced by apomictic parthenogenesis are clones of their mothers.

Automixis results in half clones. The mother’s eggs
go through meiosis, so the joining of different
products to regain diploidy will necessarily join
unlike chromosomes. Therefore, the offspring can’t
be a full clone of the mother. The mixing can come
from joining two eggs that went through different
random assortment stages, or through
recombination that mixes different parts of
homologous chromosomes in meiosis.
On the other hand, if the mom’s gametes do go through meiosis, then the haploid egg has to be manipulated so that it is once again diploid. This is called automixis (auto = self) and comes in a couple of flavors. Two eggs can fuse, each being haploid, to produce a diploid super egg. Another way is for the egg to start to develop, go through a few divisions to form what is called a blastomere, and then two blastomere cells will fuse. Finally, a haploid egg or blastomere cell can fuse with a polar body, one of the meiotic products that was cheated of some cytoplasmic factors and did not become a full fledged egg.

The result of any of these fusions is the same, a diploid egg that can develop into a whole organism without fertilization. BUT---- they are not equal to the apomictic egg described above. In meiosis, there is a division of chromosomes and possible recombination to form new sequences. Therefore, no two eggs will have exactly the same DNA, even if produced at the same time by the same mom.

If you fuse these two different eggs (or blastomeres), the sets of chromosomes ARE NOT the same, so even though the offspring will have only maternal DNA, they will not be exact clone of the mom. Automictic parthenogens are therefore called half clones; apomictic parthenogens are full clones.

The fly in the ointment here is sex determination. It is possible for a clonal offspring of a parthenogenic mom to be of the opposite sex – weird enough for you? It all depends on the system that the particular group of animals uses to determine sex.

In mammals, the sex determination system is XX/XY. Females don’t have a Y, so even if by some miracle a mammal could give birth parthenogenically (it doesn’t happen, see below for why), the offspring could be only female. In other animals, this is not so.

There are different sex determination systems in different
groups of animals. The difference between human and
insects is that in humans males have two different sex
chromosomes, while in insects, the male just gets one copy
of the only type of sex chromosome. In the komodo dragon,
the sex determination system is the same as in birds – that
makes sense, birds and reptiles have a common ancestry.
Going back to last week’s example of the Komodo Dragon, their sex determination system is ZZ/WZ, with ZZ = male. Therefore, the automictic fusion of a Z egg with a W egg could produce a female, while two Z eggs fusing would produce a male. On the other hand, apomictic parthenogenesis could produce only males, a Z egg doubles to become a ZZ egg, but a WW egg is not viable.

So komodos would produce more males than females, and their wild populations bear this out. Communities of Komodos can be up to 75% male. It would seem that this is an evolutionary strategy to help the Komodos colonize new islands. Say a female carjacks a log and lands on a new island. She undergoes parthenogenesis because no males are around, and produces males and a few females. Since parthenogenesis is quick (no time wasted on mating and seasonal fertile times) they can build a presence on the island quickly.

Then sexual reproduction can take over, increasing the genetic diversity of the species (because some drift and mutations will have taken place in the offspring). Now the Komodos might be more likely to survive an environmental change that would put on pressure for adaptation.

Another sex determination system is the XX/XO system of many insects. Pea aphids use this system, where XX = female, but those with only one X are male. Parthenogenesis in aphids can also produce only females. And wouldn’t you know it, there are terms for each. If only females are produced, it is called thelytoky; if only males, arrhenotoky, and if both can be produced, deuterotoky.

Most hymenopterans (bees, wasps) are haplodiploid.
This means that the two sexes have different number of
chromosomes. All the males are the product of unfertilized
haploid egg development, but despite this they are sexually
mature. The females are the result of sexual mating and
fertilization of haploid eggs to make them diploid. Even so,
only the rare diploid egg gets the right environment to
become a new queen.
I said above that there is an exception to haploid eggs being worthless, and here it is. Bees are haplodiploid in their sex determination. Males develop from haploid, unfertilized eggs, while females develop from fertilized, diploid eggs. The queen will mate with one or more males to produce new eggs that will be female, while she will lay unfertilized eggs to produce males, In some cases, the female workers will produce unfertilized eggs to become males as well. This is an example of arrhenotoky.

O.K., we’re almost through the terminology, one more set still to get through. Some animals, like the komodos and the pit vipers we have talked about, reproduce through sexual means, but can also reproduce by parthenogenesis under special circumstances. This is called facultative parthenogenesis. On the other hand, some species have abandoned sex all together and ONLY reproduce by parthenogenesis. This is called obligate parthenogenesis and their populations consist of only females – can you imagine the amount of gossip that must go on.

The vast majority of species that have completely abandoned sex (obligate parthenogens) are polyploid. Whiptail lizards are a good example. Of the all the species of whiptails, parthenogenic and sexual, 15 species are obligate parthenogens. And of these, all are polyploid.

Polyploid whiptails have trouble segregating chromosomes because of the increased number of them, and their spindle apparatuses are usually screwed up. If meiosis is going to fail, why use it? And if you aren’t going to use meiosis, why mate with males to produce embryos, just do it yourself? In addition, these species do tend to be found in extreme climates, where males finding females would be more difficult. Parthenogenesis is a way to keep the species going.

In genomic imprinting, genes from mother and dad are
differently regulated. Only one will be active in the
embryo, so you need inputs from ma and pa. The
silencing of the genes in one sex often are the result of
adding methyl groups to the cytosine or adenine bases,
so that they cannot be transcribed into mRNA;
therefore no protein is made.
Facultative parthenogens only resort to asexual reproduction under certain circumstances, usually when males are in short supply, or when increasing numbers quickly is in the species best interest. I say this is usually true, but the paper we talked about last time concerning pit vipers showed that they use parthenogenesis even when males are present. May be they are just fed up with men.

What is common to facultative parthenogens is a lack of genomic imprinting, ie. there are not specific genes provided ONLY by the mom and other genes provided ONLY by the dad. If genes of the different parent must interact to work properly, this is one type genomic imprinting. If the genes exist in both sperm and egg, but one or the other is always silenced, this another type of imprinting.

If there is no genomic imprinting, an individual can survive with just the genes from one parent. However, imprinting is an important regulatory mechanism in all mammals, so we won’t be adopting parthenogenesis any time soon.

Mammals are the only group of animals in which we find genomic imprinting. Of course there is an exception- the monotremes, the platypuses and echidnas. But they’re known for being difficult to put into any one box. They’re mammals, but they lay eggs for gosh sakes!  In fact, it’s their egg laying that negates their necessity for imprinting.

A 2013 review paper looks into the evolution and mechanisms of genomic imprinting in mammals. The imprinted genes are largely involved in transfer of nutrition from the mother to the embryo, ie. the placenta. All mammals have a placenta of one type or another, but monotreme placentas are very short lived, just until the yolk sac forms.

The only surviving monotremes are the platypus and
four species of echidnas. They both look like science
projects gone horribly wrong. They both are mammals,
but they lay eggs. The platypus male has poison spikes
on its hind feet, but its bill is not like a bird bill. The
mouth is on the underside. The echidna has spines and
a long, narrow snout that house both nose and mouth.
Both monotremes have electrosensors in their
bills to find prey.
On the other hand, marsupial mammals (kangaroos, etc.) give birth to very immature young, which then grow bigger and stronger in their pouches. But while in utero, they are still tethered to mama by a placental connection. This makes sense, since monotremes diverged from placental mammals long before the marsupials did.

Since the placenta is so short-lived in monotremes, many of the reasons for imprinting of genes (placental nutrition) are not required. This would leave them free to pursue parthenogenesis as a reproductive strategy, but I am not aware of any documented instances of this.

Genomic imprinting is much more involved than we have described here, and it is involved in more processes than just placental function, including the size of offspring and the competition between males for female eggs. It’s the reason that ligers are so much bigger than tigons! I encourage you to read more about it.

Next week we can look at some very interesting examples of facultative and obligate parthenogenesis, and then some exceptions as to how parthenogenesis works. Exceptions to an exception!


Renfree, M., Suzuki, S., & Kaneko-Ishino, T. (2012). The origin and evolution of genomic imprinting and viviparity in mammals Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 368 (1609), 20120151-20120151 DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2012.0151


For more information or classroom activities, see:


Genomic imprinting –