ArticlePloS one2016
Meiotic Recombination Analyses in Pigs Carrying Different Balanced Structural Chromosomal Rearrangements.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meiotic pairing and gene expression disturbance in germ cells from an infertile boar with a balanced reciprocal autosome-autosome translocation.Chromosome research : an international journal on the molecular, supramolecular and evolutionary aspects of chromosome biology · 2016Article
- Cytological basis of sterility in male and female hybrids between sibling species of grey voles Microtus arvalis and M. levis.Scientific reports · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Correct pairing, synapsis and recombination between homologous chromosomes are essential for normal meiosis. All these events are strongly regulated, and our knowledge of the mechanisms involved in this regulation is increasing rapidly. Chromosomal rearrangements are known to disturb these processes. In the present paper, synapsis and recombination (number and distribution of MLH1 foci) were studied in three boars (Sus scrofa domestica) carrying different chromosomal rearrangements. One (T34he) was heterozygote for the t(3;4)(p1.3;q1.5) reciprocal translocation, one (T34ho) was homozygote for that translocation, while the third (T34Inv) was heterozygote for both the translocation and a pericentric inversion inv(4)(p1.4;q2.3). All three boars were normal for synapsis and sperm production. This particular situation allowed us to rigorously study the impact of rearrangements on recombination. Overall, the rearrangements induced only minor modifications of the number of MLH1 foci (per spermatocyte or per chromosome) and of the length of synaptonemal complexes for chromosomes 3 and 4. The distribution of MLH1 foci in T34he was comparable to that of the controls. Conversely, the distributions of MLH1 foci on chromosome 4 were strongly modified in boar T34Inv (lack of crossover in the heterosynaptic region of the quadrivalent, and crossover displaced to the chromosome extremities), and also in boar T34ho (two recombination peaks on the q-arms compared with one of higher magnitude in the controls). Analyses of boars T34he and T34Inv showed that the interference was propagated through the breakpoints. A different result was obtained for boar T34ho, in which the breakpoints (transition between SSC3 and SSC4 chromatin on the bivalents) seemed to alter the transmission of the interference signal. Our results suggest that the number of crossovers and crossover interference could be regulated by partially different mechanisms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.