Discontinuities and unsynapsed regions in meiotic chromosomes have a cis effect on meiotic recombination patterns in normal human males
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During meiosis, homologous chromosome pairing is essential for subsequent meiotic recombination (crossover). Discontinuous chromosome regions (gaps) or unsynapsed chromosome regions (splits) in the synaptonemal complex (SC) indicate anomalies in chromosome synapsis. Recently developed immunofluorescence techniques (using antibodies against SC proteins and the crossover-associated MLH1 protein) were combined with fluorescence in situ hybridization (using centromere-specific DNA probes) to identify bivalents with gaps/splits and to examine the effect of gaps/splits on meiotic recombination patterns during the pachytene stage of meiotic prophase from three normal human males. Gaps were observed only in the heterochromatic regions of chromosomes 9 and 1, with 9q gaps accounting for 90% of these events. Most splits were also found in chromosomes 9 and 1, with 58% of splits occurring on 9q. Gaps and splits significantly altered the distribution of MLH1 foci on the SC. On gapped SC 9q, the frequency of MLH1 foci was decreased compared with controls, and single 9q crossovers tended toward a more distal distribution. Furthermore, the larger the gap the more distal the location of the MLH1 focus closest to the q arm's telomere. MLH1 foci on split SC 9 had distributions similar to those of gapped SC 9; however, splits did not change the frequencies of MLH1 foci on SC 9. This is the first demonstration that gaps and splits have an effect on meiotic recombination in humans.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".