Human oocytes harbouring damaged dna can complete meiosis-i
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Chromosomal abnormalities such as aneuploidies and DNA damage are considered a major threat to the establishment of healthy eggs and embryos. Recent landmark studies showed that mouse oocytes with damaged DNA can resume meiosis and undergo Germinal Vesicle Breakdown (GVBD), but then arrest in metaphase of meiosis-I in a process involving Spindle Assembly Checkpoint (SAC) signalling. Such a mechanism could help prevent the generation of metaphase-II (Met-II) eggs with damaged DNA. However we report that this is not the case in the human oocyte. DNA damage prevents human oocytes from undergoing GVBD in some cases. Strikingly however, most oocytes harbouring DNA damage progress through meiosis-I and subsequently extrude the first polar body (PB1) to form a metaphase-II egg, revealing the absence of a DNA-damage-induced SAC response. Analysis of the resulting metaphase-II eggs revealed highly disorganised spindles with misaligned and heavily damaged chromosomes. Our results suggest that DNA damage accumulated in meiosis-I, such as could occur during in vitro maturation procedures, does not prevent polar body extrusion and therefore could persist in morphologically normal looking metaphase-II eggs.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".