4.3 Review

Meiotic recombination errors, the origin of sperm aneuploidy and clinical recommendations

期刊

SYSTEMS BIOLOGY IN REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE
卷 57, 期 1-2, 页码 93-101

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.3109/19396368.2010.504879

关键词

chromosome aberrations; chromosome non-disjunction; infertility; meiotic recombination; sperm aneuploidy; synaptonemal complex

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Since the early 1990s male infertility has successfully been treated by intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), nevertheless concerns have been raised regarding the genetic risk of ICSI. Chromosome aneuploidy (the presence of extra or missing chromosomes) is the leading cause of pregnancy loss and mental retardation in humans. While the majority of chromosome aneuploidies are maternal in origin, the paternal contribution to aneuploidy is clinically relevant particularly for the sex chromosomes. Given that it is difficult to study female gametes investigations are predominantly conducted in male meiotic recombination and sperm aneuploidy. Research suggests that infertile men have increased levels of sperm aneuploidy and that this is likely due to increased errors in meiotic recombination and chromosome synapsis within these individuals. It is perhaps counterintuitive but there appears to be no selection against chromosomally aneuploid sperm at fertilization. In fact the frequency of aneuploidy in sperm appears to be mirrored in conceptions. Given this information this review will cover our current understanding of errors in meiotic recombination and chromosome synapsis and how these may contribute to increased sperm aneuploidy. Frequencies of sperm aneuploidy in infertile men and individuals with constitutional karyotypic abnormalities are reviewed, and based on these findings, indications for clinical testing of sperm aneuploidy are discussed. In addition, the application of single nucleotide arrays for the analysis of meiotic recombination and identification of parental origin of aneuploidy are considered.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据