Meiotic studies in two human reciprocal translocations and their association with spermatogenic failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reciprocal translocations are often associated with infertility in male carriers. However, some carriers present normal semen profiles and are identified because of repetitive pregnancy failures. METHODS: Here, we report two different cases of reciprocal translocations. The first patient carried a t(10;14) and was normozoospermic. The second patient carried a t(13;20) and was azoospermic. Synaptonemal complexes from both carriers were analysed using immunocytogenetic techniques and multi-centromere fluorescent in situ hybridization (cenM-FISH). RESULTS: Associations between the quadrivalent and the sex body or other autosomes were seen only in the t(13;20) carrier. Heterosynapsis was observed only in the t(10;14) carrier. Synaptic pairing abnormalities were seen in 71% of the spreads in the t(13;20) carrier and 30% of the spreads in the t(10;14) carrier. Recombination frequency was decreased in the t(13;20) carrier, but not in the t(10;14) carrier. CONCLUSIONS: By comparing these two different translocation carriers with different fertility outcomes, we discuss the possible mechanisms by which translocations might cause the spermatogenesis process to fail.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".