Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics logoLink to Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
. 1998 May;15(5):246–252. doi: 10.1023/A:1022580024402

The Control of Mammalian Female Meiosis: Factors that Influence Chromosome Segregation

Patricia A Hunt 1,✉
PMCID: PMC3454746  PMID: 9604755

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (767.5 KB).

REFERENCES

  • 1.Pellestor F. Frequency and distribution of aneuploidy in human female gametes. Hum Genet. 1991;86:283–288. doi: 10.1007/BF00202410. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Jacobs PA. The chromosome complement of human gametes. Oxford Rev Reprod Biol. 1992;14:48–72. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Hassold T, Hunt PA, Sherman S. Trisomy in humans: Incidence, origin and etiology. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 1993;3:398–403. doi: 10.1016/0959-437x(93)90111-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Hassold T, Sherman S, Hunt P. The origin of trisomy in humans. In: Epstein CJ, Hassold T, Lott IT, Nadel L, Patterson D, editors. Etiology and Pathogenesis of Down Syndrome. New York: Wiley-Liss; 1994. pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Abruzzo MA, Hassold TJ. Etiology of nondisjunction in humans. Environ Mol Mutagen. 1995;26:38–47. doi: 10.1002/em.2850250608. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Hassold T, Abruzzo M, Adkins K, et al. Human aneuploidy: Incidence, origin and etiology. Environ Mol Mutagen. 1997;28:167–175. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2280(1996)28:3<167::AID-EM2>3.0.CO;2-B. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Zenzes MT, Casper RF. cytogenetics of human oocytes, zygotes, and embryos after in vitro fertilization. Hum Genet. 1992;88:367–375. doi: 10.1007/BF00215667. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Penrose LS. The Early Conceptus, Normal and Abnormal. Dundee: University of St. Andrews; 1965. Mongolism as a problem in human biology; pp. 94–97. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Hawley RS, Frazier JA, Rasooly R. Separation anxiety: The etiology of nondisjunction in flies and people. Hum Mol Genet. 1994;3:1521–1528. doi: 10.1093/hmg/3.9.1521. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Henderson SA, Edwards RG. Chiasma frequency and maternal age in mammals. Nature. 1968;218:22–28. doi: 10.1038/218022a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Crowley P, Gulah D, Hayden T, Lopez P, Dyer R. A chiasmahormonal hypothesis relating Down's syndrome and maternal age. Nature. 1979;280:417–418. doi: 10.1038/280417a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Sugawara S, Mikamo K. Absence of correlation between univalent formation and meiotic nondisjunction in the aged female Chinese hamster. Cytogenet Cell Genet. 1983;35:34–40. doi: 10.1159/000131833. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Eichenlaub-Ritter U, Chandley AC, Gosden RG. The CBA mouse as a model for age-related aneuploidy in man: Studies of oocyte mutation, spindle formation and chromosome alignment during meiosis. Chromosoma. 1988;96:220–226. doi: 10.1007/BF00302361. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Warburton D. The effect of maternal age on the frequency of trisomy: Change in meiosis or in utero selection? In: Hassold TJ, Eipstein CJ, editors. Molecular and Cytogenetic Studies of Non-Disjunction. New York: Alan R. Liss; 1989. pp. 165–181. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Gaulden ME. Maternal age effect: The enigma of Down syndrome and other trisomic conditions. Mutat Res. 1992;296:69–88. doi: 10.1016/0165-1110(92)90033-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Tarin JJ. Aetiology of age-associated aneuploidy: A mechanism based on the “free radical theory of ageing.”. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:1563–1565. doi: 10.1093/humrep/10.6.1563. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Hawley RS: Exchange and chromosome segregation in eukaryotes. In Genetic Recombination, R Kucherlapati, G Smith (eds). Washington, DC Am Soc Microbiol, 1988, pp 497-525
  • 18.Carpenter ATC. Chiasma function. Cell. 1994;77:959–962. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(94)90434-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Koehler K, Hawley R, Sherman S, Hassold T. Recombination and non disjunction in flies and humans. Hum Mol Genet. 1996;5:1495–1504. doi: 10.1093/hmg/5.supplement_1.1495. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Hassold T, Merrill M, Adkins K, Freeman S, Sherman S. Recombination and maternal age-dependent non-disjunction: Molecular studies of trisomy 16. Am J Hum Genet. 1995;57:867–874. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Lamb N, Freeman SB, Savage-Austin A, et al. Non-disjunction of chromosome 21: Evidence for initiation of all maternal errors during meiosis I. Nature Genet. 1996;14:400–405. doi: 10.1038/ng1296-400. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Murray A. Cell cycle checkpoints. Curr Opin Cell Biol. 1994;6:872–876. doi: 10.1016/0955-0674(94)90059-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Elledge SJ. Cell cycle checkpoints: Preventing an identity crisis. Science. 1996;274:1664–1671. doi: 10.1126/science.274.5293.1664. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Page AW, Orr-Weaver TL. Stopping and starting the meiotic cell cycle. Curr Biol. 1997;7:23–31. doi: 10.1016/s0959-437x(97)80105-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Wells WAE. The spindle-assembly checkpoint: Aiming for a perfect mitosis, every time. Trends Cell Biol. 1996;6:228–234. doi: 10.1016/0962-8924(96)10018-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Rieder CL, Schultz A, Cole R, Sluder G. Anaphase onset in vertebrate somatic cells is controlled by a checkpoint that monitors sister kinetochore attachment to the spindle. J Cell Biol. 1994;127:1301–1310. doi: 10.1083/jcb.127.5.1301. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Li X, Nicklas RB. Mitotic forces control a cell-cycle checkpoint. Nature. 1995;373:630–632. doi: 10.1038/373630a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Rieder CL, Cole RW, Khodjakov A, Sluder G. The checkpoint delaying anaphase in response to chromosome monoorientation is mediated by an inhibitory signal produced by unattached kinetochores. J Cell Biol. 1995;130:941–948. doi: 10.1083/jcb.130.4.941. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Wells WAE, Murray AW. Aberrantly segregating centromeres activate the spindle assembly checkpoint in budding yeast. J Cell Biol. 1996;133:75–84. doi: 10.1083/jcb.133.1.75. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Hunt PA, LeMaire R, Embury P, Mroz K, Sheean L. Analysis of chromosome behavior in intact mammalian oocytes: Monitoring the segregation of a univalent chromosome during mammalian female meiosis. Hum Mol Genet. 1995;4:2007–2012. doi: 10.1093/hmg/4.11.2007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.LeMaire-Adkins R, Radke K, Hunt PA. Lack of checkpoint control at the metaphase-anaphase transition: A mechanism of meiotic non-disjunction in mammalian females. J Cell Biol. 1997;139:1611–1619. doi: 10.1083/jcb.139.7.1611. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Hunt PA, Eicher EM. Fertile male mice with three sex chromosomes: Evidence that infertility in XYY male mice is an effect of two Y chromosomes. Chromosoma. 1991;100:293–299. doi: 10.1007/BF00360527. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Sluder G, Miller FJ, Thompson EA, Wolf DE. Feedback control of metaphase-anaphase transition in sea urchin zygotes: Role of maloriented chromosomes. J Cell Biol. 1994;126:189–198. doi: 10.1083/jcb.126.1.189. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Kalousek DK. Current topic: Confined placental mosaicism and intrauterine fetal development. Placenta. 1994;15:219–230. doi: 10.1016/0143-4004(94)90014-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Munne S, Weier HUG, Grifo J, Cohen J. Chromosome mosaicism in human embryos. Biol Reprod. 1994;51:373–379. doi: 10.1095/biolreprod51.3.373. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Harper J, Coonen E, Handyside A, Winston R, Hopman A, Delhanty J. Mosaicism of autosomes and sex chromosomes in morphologically normal, monospermic preimplantation human embryos. Prenat Diagn. 1995;15:41–49. doi: 10.1002/pd.1970150109. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Battaglia DE, Goodwin P, Klein NA. Influence of maternal age on meiotic spindle assembly in oocytes from naturally cycling women. Hum Reprod. 1996;11:2217–2222. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019080. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Volarcik K, Sheean L, Goldfarb J, Woods L, Abdul-Karim F, Hunt PA. The meiotic competence of in vitro matured human oocytes is influenced by donor age: Evidence that folliculogenesis is compromised in the reproductively aged ovary. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:154–160. doi: 10.1093/humrep/13.1.154. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Eppig JJ, Schultz RM, O'Brien M, Chesnel F. Relationship between the developmental programs controlling nuclear and cytoplasmic maturation of mouse oocytes. Dev Biol. 1994;164:1–9. doi: 10.1006/dbio.1994.1175. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Eppig JJ, Schroeder AC. Capacity of mouse oocytes from preantral follicles to undergo embryogenesis and development to live young after growth, maturation, and fertilization in vitro. Biol Reprod. 1989;41:268–276. doi: 10.1095/biolreprod41.2.268. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Eppig JJ, Wigglesworth K, O'Brien MJ. Comparison of embryonic developmental competence of mouse oocytes grown with and without serum. Mol Reprod Dev. 1992;32:33–40. doi: 10.1002/mrd.1080320107. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Spears N, Boland NI, Murray AA, Gosden RG. Mouse oocytes derived from in vitro grown primary ovarian follicles are fertile. Hum Reprod. 1994;9:527–532. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a138539. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Eppig JJ, O'Brien MJ. Development in vitro of mouse oocytes from primordial follicles. Biol Reprod. 1996;54:197–207. doi: 10.1095/biolreprod54.1.197. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Harrington J, Van Bokkelen G, Mays R, Gustashaw K, Willard H. Formation of de novo centromeres and construction of first-generation human artificial microchromosomes. Nature Genet. 1997;15:345–355. doi: 10.1038/ng0497-345. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Colledge W, Carlton M, Udy G, Evans M. Disruption of c-mos causes parthenogenetic development of unfertilized mouse eggs. Nature. 1994;370:65–68. doi: 10.1038/370065a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Hashimoto N, Watanabe N, Furuta Y, et al. Parthenogenetic activation of oocytes in c-mos-deficient mice. Nature. 1994;370:68–71. doi: 10.1038/370068a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Barlow C, Hirotsune S, Paylor R, et al. ATM-deficient mice: A paradigm of ataxia telangiectasia. Cell. 1996;86:159–171. doi: 10.1016/s0092-8674(00)80086-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Elson A, Wang Y, Daugherty C, et al. Pleiotropic defects in ataxia-telangiectasia protein-deficient mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1996;93:13084–13089. doi: 10.1073/pnas.93.23.13084. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Xu Y, Ashley T, Brainerd E, Bronson R, Meyn M, Baltimore D. Targeted disruption of ATM leads to growth retardation, chromosomal fragmentation during meiosis, immune defects, and thymic lymphoma. Genes Dev. 1996;10:2411–2422. doi: 10.1101/gad.10.19.2411. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Baker SM, Bronner CE, Zhang L, et al. Male mice defective in the DNA repair gene PMS2 exhibit abnormal chromosome synapsis in meiosis. Cell. 1995;82:309–319. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(95)90318-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.de Wind N, Dekker M, Berns A, Radman M, te Riele H. Inactivation of the mouse Msh2 gene results in mismatch repair deficiency, methylation tolerance, hyperrecombination, and predisposition to cancer. Cell. 1995;82:321–330. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(95)90319-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Reitmair AH, Schmits R, Ewel A, et al. MSH2 deficient mice are viable and susceptible to lymphoid tumors. Nature Genet. 1995;11:64–70. doi: 10.1038/ng0995-64. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Baker S, Plug A, Prolla T, et al. Involvement of mouse MLH1 in DNA mismatch repair and meiotic crossing over. Nature Genet. 1996;13:336–342. doi: 10.1038/ng0796-336. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Edelman W, Cohen PE, Kane M, et al. Meiotic pachytene arrest in MLH1-deficient mice. Cell. 1996;85:1125–1134. doi: 10.1016/s0092-8674(00)81312-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Goldway M, Arbel T, Simchen G. Meiotic nondisjunction and recombination of chromosome III and homologous fragments in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics. 1993;133:149–158. doi: 10.1093/genetics/133.2.149. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Broverman S, Meneely P. Meiotic mutants that cause a polar decrease in recombination on the X chromosome in Caenorhabditis elegans. Genetics. 1994;136:119–127. doi: 10.1093/genetics/136.1.119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Bond DJ, Chandley AC. Oxford Monographs on Medical Genetics. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1983. Aneuploidy. [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Hassold T, Jacobs P. Trisomy in man. Annu Rev. Genet. 1984;18:69–97. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ge.18.120184.000441. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics are provided here courtesy of Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

RESOURCES