Literature DB >> 10936106

Meiotic studies of a human male carrier of the common translocation, t(11;22), suggests postzygotic selection rather than preferential 3:1 MI segregation as the cause of liveborn offspring with an unbalanced translocation.

S J Armstrong1, A S Goldman, R M Speed, M A Hultén.   

Abstract

The t(11;22)(q23;q11) translocation is the only non-Robertsonian rearrangement for which there are a large number of unrelated families, apparently with the same breakpoints. These families most often have been ascertained through an abnormal child with the karyotype 47,XX or XY, +der(22) t(11;22)(q23;q11). To explain the high incidence of 3:1 segregants, rarely seen in offspring of carriers of other reciprocal translocations, a number of theoretical models have been suggested. We have used both electron microscope analysis of the synaptonemal complex (SC) and dual-color FISH to investigate the meiotic chromosome behavior in a male carrier of the translocation who has the karyotype 46,XY, t(11;22)(q23;q11). Chromosome synapsis, first-meiotic chiasma configuration, and segregation behavior of this translocation have been analyzed directly. Examination of SCs by electron microscopy showed pachytene-cross formation in 49/50 nuclei. Approximately 50% (26/50) revealed a classical fully synapsed quadrivalent. A proportion of these (10/26), however, showed some central asymmetry, suggesting heterologous synapsis. The remaining cells appeared to have incomplete synapsis. FISH analysis showed only quadrivalents in all 100 metaphase I nuclei. The chiasma frequency was increased within the interstitial segments, in comparison with the same region in normal bivalents. All types of segregation category were found in metaphase II nuclei. There was no indication of preferential 3:1 anaphase I segregation. We conclude that the +der(22) constitution in offspring of carriers of t(11;22)(q23;q11) is not likely to be due to meiotic 3:1 segregation being especially common. Rather, the +der(22) constitution is more likely to be the result of postzygotic selection against other unbalanced karyotypes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10936106      PMCID: PMC1287520          DOI: 10.1086/303052

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Hum Genet        ISSN: 0002-9297            Impact factor:   11.025


  25 in total

1.  The translocation 11q;22q: a novel unbalanced karyotype.

Authors:  D Abeliovich; R Carmi
Journal:  Am J Med Genet       Date:  1990-10

2.  11q;22q translocation: third case of imbalance not due to 3:1 nondisjunction in first meiosis.

Authors:  I W Lurie; L V Podleschuk
Journal:  Am J Med Genet       Date:  1992-01-15

3.  The unbalanced offspring of the male carriers of the 11q;22q translocation: nondisjunction at meiosis II in a balanced spermatocyte.

Authors:  P Simi; M Ceccarelli; A Barachini; G Floridia; O Zuffardi
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 4.132

4.  Unusual segregation of constitutional 11q;22q translocation may be explained by crossover in interchange segment, followed by 3:1 segregation at meiosis I.

Authors:  R H Lindenbaum
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 4.132

5.  Risks of unbalanced progeny at amniocentesis to carriers of chromosome rearrangements: data from United States and Canadian laboratories.

Authors:  A Daniel; E B Hook; G Wulf
Journal:  Am J Med Genet       Date:  1989-05

6.  Not all chromosome imbalance resulting from the 11q;22q translocation is due to 3:1 segregation in first meiosis.

Authors:  D H Lockwood; A Farrier; F Hecht; J Allanson
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  1989-10       Impact factor: 4.132

7.  The 11q;22q translocation: a collaborative study of 20 new cases and analysis of 110 families.

Authors:  L Iselius; J Lindsten; A Aurias; M Fraccaro; C Bastard; A M Bottelli; T H Bui; D Caufin; L Dalprà; N Delendi
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  1983       Impact factor: 4.132

8.  Meiotic chromosome segregation in human t(11;22)(q23;q11) carriers: a theoretical consideration.

Authors:  P R Koduru; R S Chaganti
Journal:  Genome       Date:  1989-02       Impact factor: 2.166

9.  Analysis of human sperm chromosome complements from a male heterozygous for a reciprocal translocation t(11;22)(q23;q11).

Authors:  R H Martin
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  1984-04       Impact factor: 4.438

10.  Prophase of meiosis in human spermatocytes analysed by EM microspreading in infertile men and their controls and comparisons with human oocytes.

Authors:  R M Speed; A C Chandley
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 4.132

View more
  6 in total

1.  A unique case of der(11)t(11;22),-22 arising from 3:1 segregation of a maternal t(11;22) in a family with co-segregation of the translocation and breast cancer.

Authors:  Vaidehi Jobanputra; Wendy K Chung; April M Hacker; Beverly S Emanuel; Dorothy Warburton
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 3.050

Review 2.  From microscopes to microarrays: dissecting recurrent chromosomal rearrangements.

Authors:  Beverly S Emanuel; Sulagna C Saitta
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 53.242

3.  Altered bivalent positioning in metaphase I human spermatocytes from Robertsonian translocation carriers.

Authors:  Mireia Solé; Joan Blanco; Oliver Valero; Laia Vergés; Francesca Vidal; Zaida Sarrate
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-09-21       Impact factor: 3.412

4.  On the origin of crossover interference: A chromosome oscillatory movement (COM) model.

Authors:  Maj A Hultén
Journal:  Mol Cytogenet       Date:  2011-04-08       Impact factor: 2.009

5.  Impaired function of trophoblast cells derived from translocated hESCs may explain pregnancy loss in women with balanced translocation (11;22).

Authors:  Alina Shpiz; Dalit Ben-Yosef; Yael Kalma
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-08-08       Impact factor: 3.412

6.  Chromosome segregation analysis in human embryos obtained from couples involving male carriers of reciprocal or Robertsonian translocation.

Authors:  Ahmet Yilmaz; Xiao Yun Zhang; Jin-Tae Chung; Seang Lin Tan; Hananel Holzer; Asangla Ao
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-09-27       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.