Defects in Meiotic Recombination Delay Progression Through Pachytene in Mouse Spermatocytes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract During meiosis, recombination, synapsis, chromosome segregation and gene expression are coordinately regulated to ensure successful execution of this specialised cell division. In many model organisms, checkpoint controls can delay meiotic progression to allow defects or errors in these processes to be repaired or corrected. Mouse spermatocytes possess quality control checkpoints that eliminate cells with persistent irreparable defects in chromosome synapsis or recombination, and here we show that a spermatocyte checkpoint regulates progression through pachytene to accommodate delays in meiotic recombination. We have previously show that the appearance of early recombination foci is delayed in Tex19.1 -/- spermatocytes during leptotene/zygotene, but some Tex19.1 -/- spermatocytes still successfully synapse their chromosomes. Therefore, we have used autosomally synapsed Tex19.1 -/- mouse spermatocytes to assess the consequences of delayed recombination on progression through pachytene. We show that these pachytene spermatocytes are enriched for early recombination foci. This skew is not accompanied by cell death and likely reflects delays in the generation and/or maturation of recombination foci. Moreover, patterns of axis elongation, chromatin modifications, and histone H1t expression are also all skewed towards earlier substages of pachytene suggesting these events are co-ordinately regulated. Importantly, the delay in histone H1t expression in response to loss of Tex19.1 does not occur in a Spo11 mutant background, suggesting that histone H1t expression is being delayed by a recombination-dependent checkpoint. These data indicate that a recombination-dependent checkpoint operates in mouse spermatocytes that can alter progression through pachytene to accommodate spermatocytes with some types of recombination defect.
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 | 0.000 | 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".