Meiotic drive in mice carrying t-complex in their genome

The deviation of alleles and chromosomes from Mendelian inheritance is characteristic of the meiotic drive. This review describes the mechanism in question using the best-studied example of transmitted ratio distortion in the heterozygous male mice carrying t-haplotypes. The t-complex is best model for studying the meiotic drive under laboratory conditions. Putative mechanisms of meiotic drive that influence the frequency of t-haplotypes in natural populations are considered, of which prezygotic selection is the most important. The role of meiotic drive in male hybrid sterility is emphasized. The factors and models that determine the phenomenon of meiotic drive are discussed in detail.

     

Puzzling chromosome behavior in triploid females of Drosophila melanogaster

Based on a particular formation of the chromocenter and trivalents in triploid Drosophila females, as well as on asynapsis in pericentromeric regions (which is a result of trivalent competition), an explanation for the increased frequency of crossing over and nonrandom segregation of the X chromosomes and autosomes in the first meiotic division is suggested. It is proposed that a delay in pairing of the pericentromeric heterochromatic chromosome regions combined into a single chromocenter leads to the following: (1) formation of the heteroduplex structures (X structures) takes more time and, consequently, their number and the frequency of crossing over in the paired chromosome regions increases; (2) in nonhomologous chromosomes, the chromocentral connections, which normally degrade in prometaphase, are retained to fulfill a function of coorientation during the first meiotic division.     

Activity-dependent validation of excitatory versus inhibitory synapses by neuroligin-1 versus neuroligin-2

Neuroligins enhance synapse formation in vitro, but surprisingly are not required for the generation of synapses in vivo. We now show that in cultured neurons, neuroligin-1 overexpression increases excitatory, but not inhibitory, synaptic responses, and potentiates synaptic NMDAR/AMPAR ratios. In contrast, neuroligin-2 overexpression increases inhibitory, but not excitatory, synaptic responses. Accordingly, deletion of neuroligin-1 in knockout mice selectively decreases the NMDAR/AMPAR ratio, whereas deletion of neuroligin-2 selectively decreases inhibitory synaptic responses. Strikingly, chronic inhibition of NMDARs or CaM-Kinase II, which signals downstream of NMDARs, suppresses the synapse-boosting activity of neuroligin-1, whereas chronic inhibition of general synaptic activity suppresses the synapse-boosting activity of neuroligin-2. Taken together, these data indicate that neuroligins do not establish, but specify and validate, synapses via an activity-dependent mechanism, with different neuroligins acting on distinct types of synapses. This hypothesis reconciles the overexpression and knockout phenotypes and suggests that neuroligins contribute to the use-dependent formation of neural circuits.     

Deleterious mutations in various <Emphasis Type="Italic">Drosophila melanogaster</Emphasis> strains carrying meiotic mutation <Emphasis Type="Italic">c(3)G</Emphasis>

In the absence of meiotic recombination, deleterious mutations, decreasing the viability, are accumulated and fixed in small Drosophila populations. Study of the viability of hybrid progenies of three laboratory Drosophila melanogaster strains carrying meiotic mutation c(3)G ¹⁷ has suggested that the deleterious mutations are negatively synergistic in their interaction. The deleterious mutations localized to the pericentromeric region of chromosome 3 are threefold more efficient as compared with the mutations located in distal regions. Substitution of a new chromosome for the balancer chromosome in a strain with meiotic mutation c(3)G ¹⁷ partially restores (by ～20%) the viability of homozygotes c(3)G ¹⁷ /c(3)G ¹⁷ over the first 20–30 generations. Further cultivation for 30 generations with the same balancer again decreases the viability to the initial level. An epigenetic nature of deleterious mutations is discussed.     

Role of the Chromocenter in Nonrandom Meiotic Segregation of Nonhomologous Chromosomes inDrosophila melanogasterFemales

The evidence supporting universal significance of physical links between pericentromeric regions of homologous chromosomes for their bipolar orientation during the first meiotic division is discussed. The pericentromeric chiasmata between homologs or (in the absence of the latter) chromocentric links between nonhomologs, which are preserved until prometaphase, compensate for the disturbed binding between homologous pericentromeric regions in both structural or locus mutants. When the links between nonhomologs are involved, interchromosomal effects on chromosome disjunction and nonhomologous pairing were revealed by the genetic methods. An explanation suggested for genetic events observed during Drosophilameiosis conforms with the original, cytogenetically proved model of the orderly two-ring chromocenter formation and reorganization.     

Chromocentral nature of interchromosome connections coorienting nonhomologous chromosomes in meiosis of <Emphasis Type="Italic">Drosophila melanogaster</Emphasis> females

Data are presented in favor of universal significance of physical connections between pericentromeric regions of homologs in their orientation to the opposite poles of the first meiotic division in Drosophila melanogaster. Disturbances in the formation of such connections caused by structural or locus mutations are compensated for by the presence of pericentromeric chiasmata between homologs or (in the case of their absence) by chromocentral connections between nonhomologs being preserved up to the prometaphase. In the latter case, an interchromosome effect on chromosome disjunction and nonhomologous pairing is registered by genetic methods. Inhibition of the formation of the division spindle fibers during prometaphase of meiosis 1 by the long-term action of colcemide promotes the retention of connections between paired nonexchanged homologs and between nonhomologous chromosomes with abnormal homologous pairing because of heterozygosity for numerous inversions and transpositions (X and autosome 2). These connections are registered cytologically. Cytologically registered are also connections between normal X chromosomes and metacentric compounds by the arms of autosome 2 (C(2L)RM, C(2R)RM), which is the known case of the interchromosome effect on chromosome nondisjunction. It is supposed that cytologically detected associations between compounds are realized through a normal mechanism, as a result of interaction and formation of orienting connections between the homologous pericentromeric regions of these compounds. Cytological evidence is presented for colocation of compounds in the chromocentrally organized nucleus of somatic and germline cells.     

Spontaneous and radiation-induced chromosomebreaks]

It is shown by the study of the location of acentric fragments of chromosomes at metaphase and anaphase in the root cells of pea (cultivar "Capital"), in the cornea of rats (strain Wistar), in the bone marrow of mice (strain BALB), in the cultures of embryonic fibroblasts of mice (strain C57B1) and of embryonic human fibroblasts that some fragments are situated outside the equatorial plates, while others are situated within the plane of the equatorial plate. The fragments of the first type initiate mainly spontaneously, while the fragments of the second type are mainly induced by irradiation. These priniciples are observed in all the types of animan non-radiated cells could be explained if it be assumed, that all the chromosome breaks are realized before the prometaphase and by the beginning of the prometaphase the fragments are randomly distributed within the volume of the nucleus. At the prometaphase most fragments move from the equator to the pole of the cell and thus at the metaphase and anaphase are found to be located outside the equatorial plate. For the explanation of the observed ratio of the two types of fragments in an irradiated cell it is assumed that chromosome fragments resulting from breaks induced by irradiation are completely detached from chromosomes only after the beginning of the prometaphase. Possibly, the process of development of breaks is alsonot yet completed by this time, it continues and is completed at the metaphase, partially, at the anaphase of the mitosis.     

The "protective" effect of gamma-irradiation of cells in metaphase of mitosis following V-irradiation during the S period]

20,1% cells with chromosomes aberrations were obtained after UV-irradiation of embryonal fibroblasts of mice at the S-stage in vitro at a decreasing dose of 40erg/mm2. Subsequent gamma-irradiation at the metaphase of the first mitosis at a 5 krad dose led to a statistically significant decrease of the frequency of aberrant cells observed in the same mitosis down to 11,7%. The frequency of spontaneous aberrations did not change during the first few minutes after gamma-irradiation of intact cells at the metaphase. The "protective" effect of gamma-rays can not be explained either by unequal changes of the duration of mitotic stages for aberrant and normal cells, or by sticking of chromosome fragments or by breaks of bridges at the anaphase. The death of cells "under irradiation" also appears to be a hardly probable case of the effect observed. It is assumed that the decrease of the aberrations frequency is the result of predicted earlier modification of the processes of realization of potential chromosome damages into visible aberrations at the metaphase.