Literature DB >> 3360306

G-band position effects on meiotic synapsis and crossing over.

T Ashley1.   

Abstract

An examination of synaptic data from a series of X-autosome translocations and crossover data from an extensive series of autosome-autosome translocations and autosomal inversions in mice has lead to the development of a hypothesis which predicts synaptic and recombinational behavior of chromosomal aberrations during meiosis. This hypothesis predicts that in heterozygotes for chromosomal rearrangements that meiotically align G-light chromatin with G-light chromatin lack of homology will be recognized. If homologous synapsis cannot proceed, synaptonemal complex formation will cease and there will be no physical suppression of crossing over in such rearrangements. However, if a chromosomal rearrangement aligns G-light chromatin with G-dark chromatin at the time of synapsis, lack of homology will not be recognized and synaptonemal complex formation will proceed nonhomologously through the G-dark chromatin. Crossing over will be physically suppressed in this region and this suppression of crossing over will be confined to the chromosome in which the G-light chromatin is nonhomologously synapsed with G-dark chromatin. When G-light chromatin is once again aligned with G-light chromatin, lack of homology again will be recognized and either homologous synapsis will be reinitiated (as in an inversion loop), or will cease altogether (as in some translocations). Unlike the previously described "synaptic adjustment", this nonhomologous synapsis of G-light with G-dark chromatin appears to compete with homologous synapsis during early pachynema.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3360306      PMCID: PMC1203283     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genetics        ISSN: 0016-6731            Impact factor:   4.562


  14 in total

1.  Derivation of mutant t-haplotypes of the mouse by presumed duplication or deletion.

Authors:  M F Lyon; K B Bechtol
Journal:  Genet Res       Date:  1977-08       Impact factor: 1.588

2.  A new type of nonhomologous synapsis in T(X;4)1R1 translocation male mice.

Authors:  T Ashley; L B Russell
Journal:  Cytogenet Cell Genet       Date:  1986

3.  Nineteen paracentric chromosomal inversions in mice.

Authors:  T H Roderick; N L Hawes
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1974-01       Impact factor: 4.562

4.  Further observations on the haipin-tail (Thp) mutation in the mouse.

Authors:  D R Johnson
Journal:  Genet Res       Date:  1974-10       Impact factor: 1.588

5.  Hairpin-tail: a case of post-reductional gene action in the mouse egg.

Authors:  D R JOHNSON
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1974-04       Impact factor: 4.562

6.  Factors affecting the observed number of young resulting from adjacent-2 disjunction in mice carrying a translocation.

Authors:  M F Lyon; P H Glenister
Journal:  Genet Res       Date:  1977-02       Impact factor: 1.588

7.  Synaptonemal complex analysis of mouse chromosomal rearrangements. IV. Synapsis and synaptic adjustment in two paracentric inversions.

Authors:  M J Moses; P A Poorman; T H Roderick; M T Davisson
Journal:  Chromosoma       Date:  1982       Impact factor: 4.316

8.  Characterization of Giemsa dark- and light-band DNA.

Authors:  G Holmquist; M Gray; T Porter; J Jordan
Journal:  Cell       Date:  1982-11       Impact factor: 41.582

9.  Synaptonemal complex analysis of mouse chromosomal rearrangements. III. Cytogenetic observations on two paracentric inversions.

Authors:  P A Poorman; M J Moses; M T Davisson; T H Roderick
Journal:  Chromosoma       Date:  1981       Impact factor: 4.316

10.  Synaptonemal complex analysis of mouse chromosomal rearrangements. I. Cytogenetic observations on a tandem duplication.

Authors:  P A Poorman; M J Moses; L B Russell; N L Cacheiro
Journal:  Chromosoma       Date:  1981       Impact factor: 4.316

View more
  32 in total

Review 1.  Mouse chromosome 15.

Authors:  B A Mock; P E Neumann; J T Eppig; K E Huppi
Journal:  Mamm Genome       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 2.957

Review 2.  Prediction of mammalian meiotic synaptic and recombinational behavior of inversion heterozygotes based on mitotic breakpoint data and the possible evolutionary consequences.

Authors:  T Ashley
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 1.082

Review 3.  Sperm chromosome analysis of a man heterozygous for a pericentric inversion of chromosome 20.

Authors:  J Jenderny; J Gebauer; G Röhrborn; A Rüger
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 4.132

4.  Unusual segregation products in sperm from a pericentric inversion 17 heterozygote.

Authors:  Monica M Mikhaail-Philips; Barbara C McGillivray; Sara J Hamilton; Evelyn Ko; Judy Chernos; Alfred Rademaker; Renée H Martin
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2005-05-28       Impact factor: 4.132

5.  Heterozygous insertions alter crossover distribution but allow crossover interference in Caenorhabditis elegans.

Authors:  Marc Hammarlund; M Wayne Davis; Hung Nguyen; Dustin Dayton; Erik M Jorgensen
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2005-08-22       Impact factor: 4.562

6.  Presynaptic association of Rad51 protein with selected sites in meiotic chromatin.

Authors:  A W Plug; J Xu; G Reddy; E I Golub; T Ashley
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1996-06-11       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 7.  Mouse chromosome 15.

Authors:  B Mock; P E Neumann; J T Eppig; K Huppi
Journal:  Mamm Genome       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 2.957

8.  Further examination of the production-line hypothesis in mouse foetal oocytes. II. T(14; 15)6Ca heterozygotes.

Authors:  C Tease; G Fisher
Journal:  Chromosoma       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 4.316

9.  Meiotic exchange and segregation in female mice heterozygous for paracentric inversions.

Authors:  Kara E Koehler; Elise A Millie; Jonathan P Cherry; Stefanie E Schrump; Terry J Hassold
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 4.562

10.  Molecular topography of the secondary constriction region (qh) of human chromosome 9 with an unusual euchromatic band.

Authors:  R S Verma; S Luke; J P Brennan; T Mathews; R A Conte; M J Macera
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 11.025

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.