4.7 Article

Biallelic SUN5 Mutations Cause Autosomal-Recessive Acephalic Spermatozoa Syndrome

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS
Volume 99, Issue 4, Pages 942-949

Publisher

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2016.08.004

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81401251]
  2. Key Program in the Youth Elite Support Plan in Universities of Anhui Province [gxyqZD2016050]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Acephalic spermatozoa syndrome is a rare and severe form of teratozoospermia characterized by a predominance of headless spermatozoa in the ejaculate. Family clustering and consanguinity suggest a genetic origin; however, causative mutations have yet to be identified. We performed whole-exome sequencing in two unrelated infertile men and subsequent variant filtering identified one homozygous (c.824C>T [p.Thr275Met]) and one compound heterozygous (c.1006C>T [p.Arg356Cys] and c.485T>A [p.Met162Lys]) SUN5 (also named TSARG4) variants. Sanger sequencing of SUN5 in 15 additional unrelated infertile men revealed four compound heterozygous (c.381delA [p.Val128Serfs*7] and c.824C>T [p.Thr275Met]; c.381delA [p.Val128Serfs*7] and c.781G>A [p.Val261Met]; c.216G>A [p.Trp72*] and c.1043A>T [p.Asn348Ile]; c.425+1G>A/c.1043A>T [p.Asn348Ile]) and two homozygous (c.851C>G [p.Ser284*]; c.350G>A [p.Gly114Arg]) variants in six individuals. These 10 SUN5 variants were found in 8 of 17 unrelated men, explaining the genetic defect in 47.06% of the affected individuals in our cohort. These variants were absent in 100 fertile population-matched control individuals. SUN5 variants lead to absent, significantly reduced, or truncated SUN5, and certain variants altered SUN5 distribution in the head-tail junction of the sperm. In summary, these results demonstrate that biallelic SUN5 mutations cause male infertility due to autosomal-recessive acephalic spermatozoa syndrome.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available