Mlh1 Deficiency in Zebrafish Results in Male Sterility and Aneuploid as Well as Triploid Progeny in Females
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In most eukaryotes, recombination of homologous chromosomes during meiosis is necessary for proper chromosome pairing and subsequent segregation. The molecular mechanisms of meiosis are still relatively unknown, but numerous genes are known to be involved, among which are many mismatch repair genes. One of them, mlh1, colocalizes with presumptive sites of crossing over, but its exact action remains unclear. We studied meiotic processes in a knockout line for mlh1 in zebrafish. Male mlh1 mutants are sterile and display an arrest in spermatogenesis at metaphase I, resulting in increased testis weight due to accumulation of prophase I spermatocytes. In contrast, females are fully fertile, but their progeny shows high rates of dysmorphology and mortality within the first days of development. SNP-based chromosome analysis shows that this is caused by aneuploidy, resulting from meiosis I chromosomal missegregation. Surprisingly, the small percentage of progeny that develops normally has a complete triploid genome, consisting of both sets of maternal and one set of paternal chromosomes. As adults, these triploid fish are infertile males with wild-type appearance. The frequency of triploid progeny of mlh1 mutant females is much higher than could be expected for random chromosome segregation. Together, these results show that multiple solutions exist for meiotic crossover/segregation problems.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".