Somatic segregation errors predominantly contribute to the gain or loss of a paternal chromosome leading to uniparental disomy for chromosome 15
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Paternal uniparental disomy (UPD) for chromosome 15 (UPD15), which is found in approximately 2% of Angelman syndrome (AS) patients, is much less frequent than maternal UPD15, which is found in 25% of Prader-Willi syndrome patients. Such a difference cannot be easily accounted for if 'gamete complementation' is the main mechanism leading to UPD. If we assume that non-disjunction of chromosome 15 in male meiosis is relatively rare, then the gain or loss of the paternal chromosome involved in paternal and maternal UPD15, respectively, may be more likely to result from a post-zygotic rather than a meiotic event. To test this hypothesis, the origin of the extra chromosome 15 was determined in 21 AS patients with paternal UPD15 with a paternal origin of the trisomy. Only 4 of 21 paternal UPD15 cases could be clearly attributed to a meiotic error. Furthermore, significant non-random X-chromosome inactivation (XCI) observed in maternal UPD15 patients (p < 0.001) provides indirect evidence that a post-zygotic error is also typically involved in loss of the paternal chromosome. The mean maternal and paternal ages of 33.4 and 39.4 years, respectively, for paternal UPD15 cases are increased as compared with normal controls. This may be simply the consequence of an age association with maternal non-disjunction leading to nullisomy for chromosome 15 in the oocyte, although the higher paternal age in paternal UPD15 as compared with maternal UPD15 cases is suggestive that paternal age may also play a role in the origin of paternal UPD15.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".