Dramatic genome dynamics, such as chromosome instability, contribute to the remarkable genomic heterogeneity among the blastomeres comprising a single embryo during human preimplantation development. This heterogeneity, when compatible with life, manifests as constitutional mosaicism, chimerism, and mixoploidy in live-born individuals. Chimerism and mixoploidy are defined by the presence of cell lineages with different parental genomes or different ploidy states in a single individual, respectively. Our knowledge of their mechanistic origin results from indirect observations, often when the cell lineages have been subject to rigorous selective pressure during development. Here, we applied haplarithmisis to infer the haplotypes and the copy number of parental genomes in 116 single blastomeres comprising entire preimplantation bovine embryos (n = 23) following in vitro fertilization. We not only demonstrate that chromosome instability is conserved between bovine and human cleavage embryos, but we also discovered that zygotes can spontaneously segregate entire parental genomes into different cell lineages during the first post-zygotic cleavage division. Parental genome segregation was not exclusively triggered by abnormal fertilizations leading to triploid zygotes, but also normally fertilized zygotes can spontaneously segregate entire parental genomes into different cell lineages during cleavage of the zygote. We coin the term “heterogoneic division” to indicate the events leading to noncanonical zygotic cytokinesis, segregating the parental genomes into distinct cell lineages. Persistence of those cell lines during development is a likely cause of chimerism and mixoploidy in mammals.
Although human diseases of retrotransposition-derived etiology have been documented, retrotransposon RNA expression and the occurrence of retrotransposition events in the human oocyte are not studied. We investigated the RNA expression of L1 and HERV-K10 retrotransposons in human oocytes by RT-PCR analysis with designed primers. Using denucleated germinal vesicles (GVs), we detected RT-PCR products of expressed L1, HERV-K10 and, unexpectedly, SINE-R, VNTR and Alu (SVA) retrotransposons. Their transcript specificities were identified as such following RNA-FISH and their origin by cloning and sequence alignment analyses. Assessing the expression level in comparison with somatic cells by densitometry analysis, we found that although in normal lymphocytes and transformed HeLa cells their profile was in an order of L1 > HERV-K10 > SVA, remarkably this was reversed in oocytes. To investigate whether de novo retrotransposition events occur and reverse transcriptases are expressed in the human oocyte, we introduced in GVs either a retrotransposition active human L1 or mouse reverse transcriptase deficient-VL30 retrotransposon tagged with an EGFP-based retrotransposition cassette. Interestingly, in both the cases, we observed EGFP-positive oocytes, associated with an abnormal morphology for L1 and granulation for VL30, and the retrotransposition events were confirmed by PCR. Our results: (i) show that L1, HERV-K10 and SVA retrotransposons are transcriptionally expressed and (ii) provide evidence, for the first time, for retrotransposition events occurring in the human oocyte. These findings suggest that both, network of retrotransposon transcripts and controlled retrotranspositions, might serve important functions required for oocyte development and fertilization while the uncontrolled ones might explain the onset of genetic disorders.
The field of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) is evolving fast and best practice advice is essential for regulation and standardisation of diagnostic testing. The previous ESHRE guidelines on best practice for PGD, published in 2005 and 2011, are considered outdated, and the development of new papers outlining recommendations for good practice in PGT was necessary. The current paper provides recommendations on the technical aspects of PGT for monogenic/single-gene defects (PGT-M) and covers recommendations on basic methods for PGT-M and testing strategies. Furthermore, some specific recommendations are formulated for special cases, including de novo pathogenic variants, consanguineous couples, HLA typing, exclusion testing and disorders caused by pathogenic variants in the mitochondrial DNA. This paper is one of a series of four papers on good practice recommendations on PGT. The other papers cover the organisation of a PGT centre, embryo biopsy and tubing and the technical aspects of PGT for chromosomal structural rearrangements/aneuploidies. Together, these papers should assist scientists interested in PGT in developing the best laboratory and clinical practice possible.
Single-cell genomics is revolutionizing basic genome research and clinical genetic diagnosis. However, none of the current research or clinical methods for single-cell analysis distinguishes between the analysis of a cell in G1-, S- or G2/M-phase of the cell cycle. Here, we demonstrate by means of array comparative genomic hybridization that charting the DNA copy number landscape of a cell in S-phase requires conceptually different approaches to that of a cell in G1- or G2/M-phase. Remarkably, despite single-cell whole-genome amplification artifacts, the log2 intensity ratios of single S-phase cells oscillate according to early and late replication domains, which in turn leads to the detection of significantly more DNA imbalances when compared with a cell in G1- or G2/M-phase. Although these DNA imbalances may, on the one hand, be falsely interpreted as genuine structural aberrations in the S-phase cell’s copy number profile and hence lead to misdiagnosis, on the other hand, the ability to detect replication domains genome wide in one cell has important applications in DNA-replication research. Genome-wide cell-type-specific early and late replicating domains have been identified by analyses of DNA from populations of cells, but cell-to-cell differences in DNA replication may be important in genome stability, disease aetiology and various other cellular processes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.