Identification of a new<i>DPY19L2</i>mutation and a better definition of<i>DPY19L2</i>deletion breakpoints leading to globozoospermia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to analyze DPY19L2 sequence variants to investigate the mechanism leading to the entire DPY19L2 deletion in a large cohort of infertile globozoospermic patients. STUDY FINDING: An improved analysis of the DPY19L2 deletion breakpoints (BPs) allowed us to identify two BPs located in a small 1 kb region and to more precisely localize the BPs reported previously. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Three genes [spermatogenesis associated 16 (SPATA16), protein interacting with PRKCA (PICK1) and DPY19L2] were previously correlated with globozoospermia, but a homozygous deletion of the entire DPY19L2 was identified as the most frequent alteration causing this phenotype. In addition, several point mutations in this gene were reported. In previous work, we have identified nine BPs for the DPY19L2 deletion clustered in two hotspot regions, while others reported a total of five BPs. STUDY DESIGN, SAMPLES/MATERIALS, METHODS: We screened for the DPY19L2 deletion and for mutations in the DPY19L2, SPATA16 and PICK1 genes in a cohort of 21 Tunisian globozoospermic patients. In order to characterize the DPY19L2 deletion BPs, we sequenced a 2 kb fragment on low copy repeat (LCR) 1 and LCR2 in Tunisian fertile controls to distinguish between single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and LCR-specific markers. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Molecular analyses performed on 18 genetically independent individuals showed that 11 (61.1%) were homozygous for the DPY19L2 deletion, 2 (11.1%) were homozygous for the non-synonymous mutation (p.R298C) in exon 8, 1 patient (5.6%) was homozygous for a new splice-site mutation at the junction exon-intron 16 [c.1579_1580+4delAGGTAAinsTCAT] and no DPY19L2, SPATA16 or PICK1 mutations were identified for 4 patients (22.2%). By defining 15 specific LCR markers, we characterized 2 BPs for the DPY19L2 deletion in 11 patients showing the homozygous deletion. Using 20 non-LCR-specific SNPs, we identified 8 distinct haplotypes. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: A limitation of this study is the small number of patients owing to the rarity of this form of male infertility. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our data showed that some nucleotides, described by others as LCR-specific markers and used to limit their BPs, were in fact SNPs demonstrating the difficulty in precisely determining the localization of BPs. LARGE SCALE DATA: Not applicable. STUDY FUNDING AND COMPETING INTERESTS: This work was supported by the French Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), the Ministère de l'Education Nationale et de l'Enseignement Supérieur et de la Recherche, the University of Strasbourg, the University Hospital of Strasbourg, the Agence Nationale pour la Recherche, the Agence de la BioMédecine and l'Agence Universitaire de la Francophonie (AUF). There are no conflicts of interest to declare.
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) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".