Literature DB >> 1959922

Chromosome arrangements in human fibroblasts at mitosis.

W Mosgöller1, A R Leitch, J K Brown, J S Heslop-Harrison.   

Abstract

The positions of the centromeres of all 46 human chromosomes were analysed in three dimensional reconstructions of electron micrographs of 10 serially sectioned unpretreated human male fibroblast cells. The reconstructions show that the spatial positioning of the chromosomes during division is not random. The centromeres were arranged on a metaphase plate that was ellipsoidal and that tended to be flat. The distance of centromeres from the centre of the mitotic figure was correlated with chromosome size; small chromosomes tended to be central in all the metaphases. Large chromosomes were more peripheral, especially in cells that were more advanced in mitosis. Thus, there is a tendency for larger chromosomes to move outwards as metaphase advances. In many cells, the A group centromeres were overdispersed, whereas G group centromeres tended to be clustered. The acrocentric chromosomes (D and G groups) also tended to be clustered when analysed together, probably reflecting associations in nucleoli at the previous interphase. The results show that chromosome disposition is non-random and that it changes during division.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1959922     DOI: 10.1007/bf00204924

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Genet        ISSN: 0340-6717            Impact factor:   4.132


  28 in total

Review 1.  Nuclear architecture in plants.

Authors:  J S Heslop-Harrison; M D Bennett
Journal:  Trends Genet       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 11.639

Review 2.  Heterochromatization and euchromatization of whole genomes in scale insects (Coccoidea: Homoptera).

Authors:  U Nur
Journal:  Dev Suppl       Date:  1990

3.  The rationale for an ordered arrangement of chromatin in the interphase nucleus.

Authors:  D E Comings
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1968-09       Impact factor: 11.025

4.  Double in situ hybridization in combination with digital image analysis: a new approach to study interphase chromosome topography.

Authors:  P Emmerich; P Loos; A Jauch; A H Hopman; J Wiegant; M J Higgins; B N White; M van der Ploeg; C Cremer; T Cremer
Journal:  Exp Cell Res       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 3.905

5.  Rabl's model of the interphase chromosome arrangement tested in Chinese hamster cells by premature chromosome condensation and laser-UV-microbeam experiments.

Authors:  T Cremer; C Cremer; H Baumann; E K Luedtke; K Sperling; V Teuber; C Zorn
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  1982       Impact factor: 4.132

Review 6.  Arrangement of chromatin in the nucleus.

Authors:  D E Comings
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  1980-02       Impact factor: 4.132

7.  Telomere and centromere association tendencies in the human male metaphase complement.

Authors:  M Kirsch-Volders; L Hens; C Susanne
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  1980       Impact factor: 4.132

8.  Specific staining of human chromosomes in Chinese hamster x man hybrid cell lines demonstrates interphase chromosome territories.

Authors:  M Schardin; T Cremer; H D Hager; M Lang
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 4.132

9.  Reproducible compartmentalization of individual chromosome domains in human CNS cells revealed by in situ hybridization and three-dimensional reconstruction.

Authors:  L Manuelidis; J Borden
Journal:  Chromosoma       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 4.316

10.  The positions of centromeres on the somatic metaphase plate of grasses.

Authors:  J S Heslop-Harrison; M D Bennett
Journal:  J Cell Sci       Date:  1983-11       Impact factor: 5.285

View more
  18 in total

1.  Size-dependent positioning of human chromosomes in interphase nuclei.

Authors:  H B Sun; J Shen; H Yokota
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 4.033

2.  Non-random radial higher-order chromatin arrangements in nuclei of diploid human cells.

Authors:  M Cremer; J von Hase; T Volm; A Brero; G Kreth; J Walter; C Fischer; I Solovei; C Cremer; T Cremer
Journal:  Chromosome Res       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 5.239

3.  Chromosomal painting detects non-random chromosome arrangement in dasyurid marsupial sperm.

Authors:  I K Greaves; M Svartman; M Wakefield; D Taggart; A De Leo; M A Ferguson-Smith; W Rens; P C O'Brien; L Voullaire; M Westerman; J A Graves
Journal:  Chromosome Res       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 5.239

4.  Chromosome pairing does not contribute to nuclear architecture in vegetative yeast cells.

Authors:  Alexander Lorenz; Jörg Fuchs; Reinhard Bürger; Josef Loidl
Journal:  Eukaryot Cell       Date:  2003-10

5.  The three-dimensional study of chromosomes and upstream binding factor-immunolabeled nucleolar organizer regions demonstrates their nonrandom spatial arrangement during mitosis.

Authors:  C Klein; T Cheutin; M F O'Donohue; L Rothblum; H Kaplan; A Beorchia; L Lucas; L Héliot; D Ploton
Journal:  Mol Biol Cell       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 4.138

Review 6.  Chromosome positioning and male infertility: it comes with the territory.

Authors:  Zaida Sarrate; Mireia Solé; Francesca Vidal; Ester Anton; Joan Blanco
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2018-09-18       Impact factor: 3.412

7.  The radial positions of metaphase chromosomes may be a consequence of the relative strength of their interaction with the spindle and their size.

Authors:  H L Fletcher
Journal:  Chromosome Res       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 5.239

Review 8.  The nucleolus.

Authors:  H G Schwarzacher; F Wachtler
Journal:  Anat Embryol (Berl)       Date:  1993-12

9.  The distribution of polar ejection forces determines the amplitude of chromosome directional instability.

Authors:  Kevin Ke; Jun Cheng; Alan J Hunt
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2009-05-14       Impact factor: 10.834

Review 10.  Cellular response to low adhesion nanotopographies.

Authors:  Matthew J Dalby
Journal:  Int J Nanomedicine       Date:  2007
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.