
ROLE OF CHROMOSOMES IN EMBRYO DEVELOPMENT Geraedts JPM* *Corresponding Author: Professor Dr. Joep P.M. Geraedts, Department of Genetics and Cell Biology, University of Maastricht, P.O. Box 1475, 6201 BL Maastricht, The Netherlands; Tel.: +31-43-3875840; Fax: +31-43-3877877; E-mail: joep.geraedts@gen.unimaas.nl page: 3
|
ANEUPLOIDY IN OOCYTES
Since the first report on the study of meiosis in human oocytes [18], numerous publications have described the cytogenetic analysis of inseminated oocytes that failed to fertilize in vitro. Data on 2,434 oocytes, reported by 12 groups, have shown that the incidence of chromosome anomalies ranges from 8 to 54% with an average of 27%. The latter figure can be subdivided as follows: 13% hypohaploidy, 8% hyperhaploidy, 2% structural abnormalities and 4% diploidy [19]. In another study of 400 oocytes showing no sign of fertilization or cleavage, 124 were unanalyzable and 79 were normal haploid [20]. The remaining oocytes were abnormal, but no instance of hyperhaploidy was noted. An increase in maternal age resulted in an increased embryonic aneuploidy rate and in an increased frequency of spontaneous abortion. Both increases result from non disjunction that gives rise to autosomal trisomy. For all chromosomes except the largest, the non disjunction rate increased with age [21]. On the other hand, monosomy X showed an inverse maternal age effect. The maternal age effect on aneuploidy that holds in spontaneous abortions and liveborns has also been demonstrated in morphologically and developmentally normal pre implantation embryos [22]. Oocyte meiosis is very sensitive to endogenous or exogenous factors, that could lead to chromosomally abnormal oocytes and thus to abnormal zygotes [23].
The difference in age-related aneuploidy between oocytes and miscarried embryos might be explained on the basis of pre implantation or early post implantation loss. For chromosomes 13, 18 and 21, aneuploidy in clinically recognized pregnancies increases from 1.3% in the 35-39 age group to 4.3% in the 40-45 age group. However, in cleavage stage embryos, it has been observed by that the aneuploidy rates for chromosomes X, Y, 13, 18 and 21 increased from 5 and 10% in the 20-34 and 35-39 age groups, respectively, to 28% in the 40-45 age group [22]. If only normally developing embryos are considered, the differences are even greater, increasing from 4% in the 20-34 age group to 37.2% in the 40-45 age group.
There seems to be no effect of maternal age on triploidy and tetraploidy, which originate at fertilization and during pre implantation development, respectively. This confirms that maternal age is a factor that only influences meiosis. The cause of non disjunction in oocytes of older women is largely unknown. Although an increase in maternal age is accompanied by a reduction in chiasma frequency of all chromosomes, the distribution of the meiotic errors is not identical for every chromosome. For example, trisomy 16 always show a maternal meiosis-I (M-I) error. Trisomy 18, on the other hand, results predominantly from meiosis-II (M-II) errors [24].
Premature centromere division at M-I has been suggested as an alternative mechanism for trisomy formation [25,26]. Unfertilized oocytes obtained following ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization (IVF) were studied during M-II for M-I errors. None of the chromosome complements studied had an extra whole chromosome. This finding was not in line with the theory of non disjunction which proposes that both chromosomes of the bivalent fail to disjoin at M-I so that both move to one pole, and result in an additional whole chromosome at M-II metaphase. The only abnormality found in the M-II oocytes was that single chromatids (half chromosomes) replaced whole chromosomes. Analysis of the chromosomally abnormal oocytes revealed a close correlation with results on trisomies in spontaneous abortions, with respect to chromosome distribution, frequency, and maternal age, and indicated the likelihood of the chromatid abnormalities being the M-I non disjunction products that led to trisomy formation after fertilization. In light of the data which show that altered recombination patterns of the affected chromosomes are a key feature of most M-I origin trisomies, the oocyte data obtained by Angell [25,26] imply that the vulnerable meiotic configurations arising from altered recombination patterns are processed as functional univalents in older women.
The association between non disjunction and maternal age in M-II oocytes using FISH has been analyzed in a study of oocytes and their corresponding polar bodies [27]. The chromosomes of both division products complemented each other and provided an internal control to differentiate between aneuploidy and technical errors. Two mechanisms of non disjunction were determined. First, non disjunction of bivalent chromosomes going to the same pole and, second, non disjunction by premature chromatid chromatid separation (predivision) of univalent chromosomes producing either a balanced (2 + 2) or unbalanced (3 + 1) distribution of chromatids into the first polar body and M-II oocytes. Balanced predivision of oocytes, proposed by Angell [20] as a major mechanism of aneuploidy, increases significantly with time in culture, which suggests that this phenomenon should be carefully interpreted. Unbalanced predivision and classical non disjunction were unaffected by aging of the oocyte. In comparing oocytes from women younger than 35 years of age with oocytes from women above the age of 40 years, a significant increase in non disjunction of full dyads was found in the oocytes with analyzable polar bodies and no errors on FISH. Premature predivision of chromatids was also found to cause non disjunction, but it did not increase with maternal age.
The effect of maternal age on the incidence of chromosomal abnormalities was investigated on more than 3,000 unfertilized human oocytes [28]. Various types of numerical abnormalities were observed but no significant difference was found in the mean age of women according to the chromosome abnormalities, and there was a positive relationship between maternal age and the global rate of aneuploidy, in agreement with the findings of epidemiological studies [28].
|
|
|
|



 |
Number 27 VOL. 27 (2), 2024 |
Number 27 VOL. 27 (1), 2024 |
Number 26 Number 26 VOL. 26(2), 2023 All in one |
Number 26 VOL. 26(2), 2023 |
Number 26 VOL. 26, 2023 Supplement |
Number 26 VOL. 26(1), 2023 |
Number 25 VOL. 25(2), 2022 |
Number 25 VOL. 25 (1), 2022 |
Number 24 VOL. 24(2), 2021 |
Number 24 VOL. 24(1), 2021 |
Number 23 VOL. 23(2), 2020 |
Number 22 VOL. 22(2), 2019 |
Number 22 VOL. 22(1), 2019 |
Number 22 VOL. 22, 2019 Supplement |
Number 21 VOL. 21(2), 2018 |
Number 21 VOL. 21 (1), 2018 |
Number 21 VOL. 21, 2018 Supplement |
Number 20 VOL. 20 (2), 2017 |
Number 20 VOL. 20 (1), 2017 |
Number 19 VOL. 19 (2), 2016 |
Number 19 VOL. 19 (1), 2016 |
Number 18 VOL. 18 (2), 2015 |
Number 18 VOL. 18 (1), 2015 |
Number 17 VOL. 17 (2), 2014 |
Number 17 VOL. 17 (1), 2014 |
Number 16 VOL. 16 (2), 2013 |
Number 16 VOL. 16 (1), 2013 |
Number 15 VOL. 15 (2), 2012 |
Number 15 VOL. 15, 2012 Supplement |
Number 15 Vol. 15 (1), 2012 |
Number 14 14 - Vol. 14 (2), 2011 |
Number 14 The 9th Balkan Congress of Medical Genetics |
Number 14 14 - Vol. 14 (1), 2011 |
Number 13 Vol. 13 (2), 2010 |
Number 13 Vol.13 (1), 2010 |
Number 12 Vol.12 (2), 2009 |
Number 12 Vol.12 (1), 2009 |
Number 11 Vol.11 (2),2008 |
Number 11 Vol.11 (1),2008 |
Number 10 Vol.10 (2), 2007 |
Number 10 10 (1),2007 |
Number 9 1&2, 2006 |
Number 9 3&4, 2006 |
Number 8 1&2, 2005 |
Number 8 3&4, 2004 |
Number 7 1&2, 2004 |
Number 6 3&4, 2003 |
Number 6 1&2, 2003 |
Number 5 3&4, 2002 |
Number 5 1&2, 2002 |
Number 4 Vol.3 (4), 2000 |
Number 4 Vol.2 (4), 1999 |
Number 4 Vol.1 (4), 1998 |
Number 4 3&4, 2001 |
Number 4 1&2, 2001 |
Number 3 Vol.3 (3), 2000 |
Number 3 Vol.2 (3), 1999 |
Number 3 Vol.1 (3), 1998 |
Number 2 Vol.3(2), 2000 |
Number 2 Vol.1 (2), 1998 |
Number 2 Vol.2 (2), 1999 |
Number 1 Vol.3 (1), 2000 |
Number 1 Vol.2 (1), 1999 |
Number 1 Vol.1 (1), 1998 |
|
|