[Chromatid structural changes of chromosomal origin as a result of mitotic crossing over between sister chromatids in ring chromosomes].
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Chromatids↗
SEARCH · Search PubMed
Results for “Chromatids”
Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Evidence for nonrandom rejoining of chromatid breaks and its relation to the origin of sister-chromatid exchanges.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Animals↗
Spatial distribution of old and new chromatid sub-units and frequency of chromatid exchanges in induced human lymphocyte endoreduplications.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Autoradiography↗
A manyfold increase in sister chromatid exchanges in Bloom's syndrome lymphocytes.
Dividing cells from persons with Bloom's syndrome, an autosomal recessive disorder of growth, exhibit increased numbers of chromatid breaks and rearrangements. A highly characteristic feature of the chromosome instability in this syndrome is the tendency for exchanges to occur between chromatids of homologous chromosomes at homologous sites. In the present experiments, a cytogenetic technique by which the sister chromatids of a metaphase chromosome are stained differentially has been used to demonstrate a striking and possibly specific, but hitherto unrecognized, increase in the frequency with which sister chromatids also exchange segments. The cells were grown in bromodeoxyuridine and stained with 33258 Hoechst and Giemsa. Whereas phytohemagglutinin-stimulated lymphocytes from normal controls had a mean of 6.9 sister chromatid exchanges per metaphase (range 1-14), those from persons with Bloom's syndrome had a mean of 89.0 (range 45-162). Normal frequencies of sister chromatid exchanges were found in cells heterozygous for the Bloom's syndrome gene, and also in cells either homozygous or heterozygous for the genes of the Louis-Bar (ataxia telangiectasia) syndrome and Fanconi's anemia, two other rare disorders characterized by chromosome instability. In a differentially stained chromatid interchange configuration discovered during the study, it was possible to determine the new distribution of both sister and non-sister-but-homologous chromatids that had resulted from numerous exchanges. By following shifts in the pattern of staining from chromatid to chromatid, visual evidence was obtained that the quadriradial configurations long recognized as characteristic of Bloom's syndrome represent exchanges between homologous chromosomes, apparently at homologous points. We postulate that the increase in the frequency of exchanges between nonsister-but-homologous chromatids and those between sister chromatids in Bloom's syndrome represents aspects of one and the same disturbance. A study of this phenomenon in relation to the clinical features of Bloom's syndrome may be helpful eventually in understanding the biological significance of chromatid exchange in somatic cells.
Abnormalities, Multiple↗
Atomic force microscopy of human metaphase chromosomes after differential staining of sister chromatids.
Human metaphase chromosomes, in which 5-bromo-deoxyuridine (BrdU) had been incorporated into the DNA, were treated with the fluorescent plus Giemsa (FPG) method. Use of this method distinctly stained one of the paired sister chromatids with the Giemsa solution due to the difference in content of BrdU in the two chromatids. These chromosomes with their differential staining of sister chromatids were observed by atomic force microscopy (AFM). In the air-dried specimens, one of the paired chromatids that was stained strongly with Giemsa solution was about two times higher than the counterpart that was stained faintly with Giemsa solution. In the critical point dried chromosomes, the height of the Giemsa positive chromatid roughly matched that of the Giemsa negative counterpart. These findings imply that the arrangement of the Giemsa negative chromatid after FPG staining is fragile and easily collapses due to the surface tension of water during air-drying. At higher magnifications, the surface structure differed between Giemsa positive and negative chromatids; the Giemsa positive chromatid (i.e., unifilarly BrdU-incorporated chromatid) was composed of fibrous structures while the Giemsa negative chromatid (i.e., bifilarly BrdU-incorporated chromatid) exhibited a fine granular appearance. These structural changes in the sister chromatids are thought to arise from the ultraviolet irradiation and heating of the chromosomes during FPG staining.
Antimetabolites↗
Production of chromatid breaks by single dsb: evidence supporting the signal model.
PURPOSE: The signal model proposes that all chromatid breaks arise from a single DNA double strand break (dsb) via a recombinational exchange mechanism. Here the prediction that chromatid breaks arise from a single dsb is tested. METHOD: The genetically engineered Chinese hamster cell line GS19-43 containing a unique yeast I-SceI recognition site was treated with I-SceI endonuclease (Meganuclease) in the presence of the porating agent streptolysin O. Chromatid breaks were scored at 4h, chromosome breaks at 18 and 22h following treatment (cells used for a 4h fixation were prelabelled with BrdU over two cell-cycles). Positive controls were treated with the restriction endonuclease Pst 1. RESULTS: I-SceI endonuclease produced chromatid breaks and at higher enzyme concentrations isochromatid breaks but no chromatid interchanges. About 16% of the chromatid breaks had a 'colour-switch' between the sister-chromatids at the site of breakage, as revealed by FPG staining. At the longer fixation times (18 and 22 h) chromosome breaks were observed, but again no interchanges were seen. Chromatid and chromosome breaks always appeared on the same chromosome. CONCLUSIONS: The production of chromatid breaks from a single dsb fulfils the prediction of the signal model. Moreover, the production of colour-switch breaks at a similar frequency to that for ionizing radiation indicates that chromatid breaks are produced via recombinational exchanges, a significant proportion of which occurs between sister chromatids. The majority is intrachromatid, not involving strand-switches. The absence of interchromosomal exchanges at all fixation times indicates a requirement of two dsb in two different chromosomes for their formation.
Animals↗
Progress towards understanding the nature of chromatid breakage.
The wide range of sensitivities of stimulated T-cells from different individuals to radiation-induced chromatid breakage indicates the involvement of several low penetrance genes that appear to link elevated chromatid breakage to cancer susceptibility. The mechanisms of chromatid breakage are not yet fully understood. However, evidence is accumulating that suggests chromatid breaks are not simply expanded DNA double-strand breaks (DSB). Three models of chromatid breakage are considered. The classical breakage-first and the Revell "exchange" models do not accord with current evidence. Therefore a derivative of Revell's model has been proposed whereby both spontaneous and radiation-induced chromatid breaks result from DSB signaling and rearrangement processes from within large looped chromatin domains. Examples of such rearrangements can be observed by harlequin staining whereby an exchange of strands occurs immediately adjacent to the break site. However, these interchromatid rearrangements comprise less than 20% of the total breaks. The rest are thought to result from intrachromatid rearrangements, including a very small proportion involving complete excision of a looped domain. Work is in progress with the aim of revealing these rearrangements, which may involve the formation of inversions adjacent to the break sites. It is postulated that the disappearance of chromatid breaks with time results from the completion of such rearrangements, rather than from the rejoining of DSB. Elevated frequencies of chromatid breaks occur in irradiated cells with defects in both nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ) and homologous recombination (HR) pathways, however there is little evidence of a correlation between reduced DSB rejoining and disappearance of chromatid breaks. Moreover, at least one treatment which abrogates the disappearance of chromatid breaks with time leaves DSB rejoining unaffected. The I-SceI DSB system holds considerable promise for the elucidation of these mechanisms, although the break frequency is relatively low in the cell lines so far derived. Techniques to study and improve such systems are under way in different cell lines. Clearly, much remains to be done to clarify the mechanisms involved in chromatid breakage, but the experimental models are becoming available with which we can begin to answer some of the key questions.
Animals↗
Statistical analysis of chromatid interference.
The nonrandom occurrence of crossovers along a single strand during meiosis can be caused by either chromatid interference, crossover interference or both. Although crossover interference has been consistently observed in almost all organisms since the time of the first linkage studies, chromatid interference has not been as thoroughly discussed in the literature, and the evidence provided for it is inconsistent. In this paper with virtually no restrictions on the nature of crossover interference, we describe the constraints that follow from the assumption of no chromatid interference for single spore data. These constraints are necessary consequences of the assumption of no chromatid interference, but their satisfaction is not sufficient to guarantee no chromatid interference. Models can be constructed in which chromatid interference clearly exists but is not detectable with single spore data. We then extend our analysis to cover tetrad data, which permits more powerful tests of no chromatid interference. We note that the traditional test of no chromatid interference based on tetrad data does not make full use of the information provided by the data, and we offer a statistical procedure for testing the no chromatid interference constraints that does make full use of the data. The procedure is then applied to data from several organisms. Although no strong evidence of chromatid interference is found, we do observe an excess of two-strand double recombinations, i.e., negative chromatid interference.
Animals↗
Involvement of chromatid cohesiveness at the centromere and chromosome arms in meiotic chromosome segregation: a cytological approach.
Kinetochores and chromatid cores of meiotic chromosomes of the grasshopper species Arcyptera fusca and Eyprepocnemis plorans were differentially silver stained to analyse the possible involvement of both structures in chromatid cohesiveness and meiotic chromosome segregation. Special attention was paid to the behaviour of these structures in the univalent sex chromosome, and in B univalents with different orientations during the first meiotic division. It was observed that while sister chromatids of univalents are associated at metaphase I, chromatid cores are individualised independently of their orientation. We think that cohesive proteins on the inner surface of sister chromatids, and not the chromatid cores, are involved in the chromatid cohesiveness that maintains associated sister chromatids of bivalents and univalents until anaphase I. At anaphase I sister chromatids of amphitelically oriented B univalents or spontaneous autosomal univalents separate but do not reach the poles because they remain connected at the centromere by a long strand which can be visualized by silver staining, that joins stretched sister kinetochores. This strand is normally observed between sister kinetochores of half-bivalents at metaphase II and early anaphase II. We suggest that certain centromere proteins that form the silver-stainable strand assure chromosome integrity until metaphase II. These cohesive centromere proteins would be released or modified during anaphase II to allow normal chromatid segregation. Failure of this process during the first meiotic division could lead to the lagging of amphitelically oriented univalents. Based on our results we propose a model of meiotic chromosome segregation. During mitosis the cohesive proteins located at the centromere and chromosome arms are released during the same cellular division.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
Animals↗
Replication-dependent sister chromatid recombination in rad1 mutants of Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Homolog recombination and unequal sister chromatid recombination were monitored in rad1-1/rad1-1 diploid yeast cells deficient for excision repair, and in control cells, RAD1/rad1-1, after exposure to UV irradiation. In a rad1-1/rad1-1 diploid, UV irradiation stimulated much more sister chromatid recombination relative to homolog recombination when cells were irradiated in the G1 or the G2 phases of the cell cycle than was observed in RAD1/rad1-1 cells. Since sister chromatids are not present during G1, this result suggested that unexcised lesions can stimulate sister chromatid recombination events during or subsequent to DNA replication. The results of mating rescue experiments suggest that unexcised UV dimers do not stimulate sister chromatid recombination during the G2 phase, but only when they are present during DNA replication. We propose that there are two types of sister chromatid recombination in yeast. In the first type, unexcised UV dimers and other bulky lesions induce sister chromatid recombination during DNA replication as a mechanism to bypass lesions obstructing the passage of DNA polymerase, and this type is analogous to the type of sister chromatid exchange commonly observed cytologically in mammalian cells. In the second type, strand scissions created by X-irradiation or the excision of damaged bases create recombinogenic sites that result in sister chromatid recombination directly in G2. Further support for the existence of two types of sister chromatid recombination is the fact that events induced in rad1-1/rad1-1 were due almost entirely to gene conversion, whereas those in RAD1/rad1-1 cells were due to a mixture of gene conversion and reciprocal recombination.
Cell Cycle↗
Sister chromatids are often incompletely aligned in meristematic and endopolyploid interphase nuclei of Arabidopsis thaliana.
We analyzed whether sister chromatids are continuously aligned in meristematic and endopolyploid Arabidopsis interphase nuclei by studying sister-chromatid alignment at various chromosomal positions. FISH with individual BACs to flow-sorted 4C root and leaf nuclei frequently yielded more than two hybridization signals, indicating incomplete or absent sister-chromatid alignment. Up to 100% of 8C, 16C, and 32C nuclei showed no sister-chromatid alignment at defined positions. Simultaneous FISH with BACs from different chromosomal positions revealed more frequent sister-chromatid alignment in terminal than in midarm positions. Centromeric positions were mainly aligned up to a ploidy level of 16C but became separated or dispersed in 32C nuclei. DNA hypomethylation (of the whole genome) and transcriptional activity (at FWA gene position) did not impair sister-chromatid alignment. Only 6.1% of 4C leaf nuclei showed sister-chromatid separation of the entire chromosome 1 top arm territories. Homozygous transgenic tandem repeat (lac operator) arrays showing somatic homologous pairing more often than average euchromatic loci did not promote an increased frequency of sister-chromatid alignment. The high frequency of separated sister-chromatid arm positions in > or =4C nuclei suggests that sister-chromatid cohesion is variable, dynamic, and not obligatory along the entire chromosome arm in meristematic and differentiated Arabidopsis nuclei.
Arabidopsis↗
Induction of chromatid breaks by carbon K-shell ultrasoft X rays.
Chromatid breaks have previously been shown to be induced in G2-phase cells after exposure to ionizing radiation (X and gamma rays) as a linear function of dose, consistent with a single-event mechanism. DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are thought to be the initiating lesion, and experiments with a genetically engineered cell line containing a single DSB site also indicate that a single DSB is sufficient to induce a chromatid break. Although the precise mechanism of conversion of an isolated DSB into a chromatid break is not yet understood, it is known that a proportion of chromatid breaks result from rearrangements between sister chromatids. Here we report further evidence for the single-event hypothesis for the formation of chromatid breaks. The evidence derives from experiments in which chromatid breaks have been induced by exposure of Chinese hamster cells to ultrasoft carbon K-shell X rays. Since the energy of carbon K-shell X rays is not sufficient for the secondary electrons to span more than one DNA double helix, we conclude that single traversals, and hence single (complex) DSBs, are responsible for the formation of chromatid breaks. We find that, as for 60Co gamma rays, around 10% of the carbon K-shell X-ray-induced chromatid breaks have associated color switches at breakpoints, indicating that they arise through sister chromatid rearrangements.
Animals↗
X-ray sensitization of chromatids with unifilarly and bifilary substituted DNA.
When cells are grown for two rounds of DNA replication in the presence of the thymidine analogue 5-bromodeoxyuridine, chromosomes containing one chromatid with unifilarly substituted DNA and one with bifilarly substituted DNA are found. These can be distinguished by harlequin staining techniques that stain one chromatid dark and one light. When the degree of substitution is 60% or greater, 3 times as many X-ray-induced chromatid breaks are produced as in unsubstituted chromatids. This represents maximal sensitization. The unifilarly substituted (dark) chromatid is as sensitive as its bifilarly substituted (light) sister chromatid. If cells are grown in low concentrations of 5-bromo-deoxyuridine (BrdUrd), then the amount of substitution is less and the bifilarly substituted chromatid is more sensitive than the unifilarly substituted one. When large numbers of cells are grown in very low concentrations of BrdUrd, the analogue is almost completely depleted during the first round of replication leading to harlequin chromosomes containing one unsubstituted (dark) and one unifilarly substituted (light) chromatid. Under these conditions a maximal sensitization between light-staining and dark-staining chromatids can occur. This can be confused with the differential sensitivity between unifilarly and bifilarly substituted chromatids. The apparent discrepant results obtained by different investigators are most likely caused by the use of very low levels of BrdUrd in some of the experiments.
Animals↗
Mechanisms of radiation-induced chromatid breaks.
Chromatid breaks are thought to result from DNA double-strand breaks (dsb) but the mechanisms are not yet understood. The early (but still prevailing) 'breakage-first' hypothesis fails to explain the large size of chromatid breaks; many of which are estimated to represent the apparent loss of between 15 and 45 Mbp (up to 30% of an average chromatid). The alternative 'exchange' hypothesis of Revell has potential for explaining the large sizes of deletions, but assumes the interaction of two lesions which therefore predicts a quadratic dependence of chromatid breaks on radiation dose. The exchange hypothesis is not tenable for mammalian cells since chromatid breaks are observed to be induced linearly with dose in both human and rodent cells. An alternative 'signal' model of chromatid breaks is outlined whereby a single dsb, occurring within a large looped chromatin domain, is signalled (possibly by molecules such as DNAPK or ATM protein) and triggers the cell to undergo a recombinational exchange, either within a chromatid or between sister chromatids. If incomplete, such recombinational exchanges would appear as chromatid breaks at metaphase. It is suggested that the large looped chromatin domains could be equivalent to one or more likely several replication 'factories' in which the DNA processing enzymes required for exchange formation would be located.
Animals↗
Meiosis in holocentric chromosomes: kinetic activity is randomly restricted to the chromatid ends of sex univalents in Graphosoma italicum (Heteroptera).
We have determined the number and location of the nucleolar organizing regions in spermatocytes of Graphosoma italicum (2n = 12A + XYmale/XXfemale) by means of silver impregnation, chromomycin A3/distamycin A staining and fluorescence in situ hybridization. The identification of only one nucleolar organizing region located at one of the X chromosome ends has provided a suitable cytological marker to analyse the segregation of this univalent and that of the XY pseudobivalent during the first and second meiotic divisions respectively. Our results clearly show that at first meiotic metaphase the chromatids of the X chromosome are orientated with their long axes perpendicular to the polar axis. Although the kinetic activity is restricted to only one end in both X chromatids during the first meiotic division, both ends of the same chromatid have the same probability of showing such kinetic activity. In this sense, we also report that the chromatid segregation may be initiated either at the same sister chromatid ends or at opposite ends in each chromatid. Thus, this indicates a sex chromatid independence as regards to the chromatid segregation during the first meiotic division. Throughout the second meiotic division both ends of the X chromatid are involved with the same probability in the end-to-end association to conform the XY pseudobivalent. This also implies a random localization of the kinetic activity at the ends opposite to those involved in the end-to-end association.
Animals↗
Mutagen sensitivity in humans. A comparison between two nomenclature systems for recording chromatid breaks.
Currently, there are two systems in use for recording chromatid breaks, either spontaneously occurring or induced by mutagens: The International System for Human Cytogenetic Nomenclature (ISCN) and the Chatham Barrs Inn Conference (CBIC) recommendation. The former system considers that a chromatid break is recognized only when the chromatid fragment is displaced to the other side of its sister chromatid, while all others, regardless of the distance between the two broken ends, are called chromatid gaps. The CBIC system recognizes a chromatid break when the intervening achromatic segment is longer than or equal to the diameter of the chromatid, whether the fragment is displaced or not. Minor lesions are called chromatid gaps. We conducted experiments using bleomycin treatment of human cells (primary cultures or lymphoblastoid cell lines) and read the chromatid lesions both ways. We conclude that the CBIC system appears to have more direct biologic relevance than the ISCN system.
Bleomycin↗
Induction and disappearance of G2 chromatid breaks in lymphocytes after low doses of low-LET gamma-rays and high-LET fast neutrons.
PURPOSE: To determine by means of the G2 assay the number of chromatid breaks induced by low-LET gamma-rays and high-LET neutrons, and to compare the kinetics of chromatid break rejoining for radiations of different quality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The G2 assay was performed on blood samples of four healthy donors who were irradiated with low-LET gamma-rays and high-LET neutrons. In a first set of experiments a dose-response curve for the formation of chromatid breaks was carried out for gamma-rays and neutrons with doses ranging between 0.1 and 0.5 Gy. In a second set of experiments, the kinetics of chromatid break formation and disappearance were investigated after a dose of 0.5 Gy using post-irradiation times ranging between 0.5 and 3.5 h. For the highest dose of 0.5 Gy, the number of isochromatid breaks was also scored. RESULTS: No significant differences in the number of chromatid breaks were observed between low-LET gamma-rays and high-LET neutrons for the four donors at any of the doses given. The dose-response curves for the formation of chromatid breaks are linear for both radiation qualities and RBEs = 1 were obtained. Scoring of isochromatid breaks at the highest dose of 0.5 Gy revealed that high-LET neutrons were, however, more effective at inducing isochromatid breaks (RBE = 6.2). The rejoining experiments further showed that the kinetics of disappearance of chromatid breaks following irradiation with low-LET gamma-rays or high-LET neutrons were not significantly different. Half-times of 0.92 h for gamma-rays and 0.84 h for neutrons were obtained. CONCLUSIONS: Applying the G2 assay, the results demonstrate that at low doses of irradiation, the induction as well as the disappearance of chromatid breaks is independent of the LET of the radiation qualities used (0.24 keV x microm(-1) 60Co gamma-rays and 20 keV x microm(-1) fast neutrons). As these radiation qualities produce the same initial number of double-strand breaks, the results support the signal model that proposes that chromatid breaks are the result of an exchange process which is triggered by a single double-strand break.
Adult↗
G2 chromatid breaks in murine SCID cells.
The G2 chromosomal radiosensitivity of murine SCID (severe combined immunodeficient) and normal fibroblasts has been investigated. We have also investigated the G2 response of these cell lines to the restriction endonuclease PvuII. We show that chromatid breaks are induced linearly with radiation dose in both cell lines and SCID cells are approximately 1.6 times as radiosensitive as normal murine fibroblasts when tested using a G2 assay with a 2 h sampling time. The disappearance of chromatid breaks with time after irradiation was first order with a half-time of approximately 1.5 h in both cell lines. Thus, although SCID cells are deficient in the rejoining of double-strand breaks (dsb), they show similar kinetics of disappearance of chromatid breaks with time as normal CB17 cells, indicating that the 'rejoining' of chromatid breaks does not reflect dsb repair. When CB17 and SCID cells were treated with PvuII, which generates dsb in cellular DNA in the presence of streptolysin O (as a porating agent), approximately 3 times more chromatid breaks were observed in SCID than CB17 cells. We conclude that SCID cells convert a higher number of dsb into chromatid breaks than do CB17 cells. The conversion process is interpreted in terms of the recently proposed 'signal' model, whereby a signal, resulting from a single dsb, triggers the cell to make a recombinational exchange which, if incomplete, gives rise to a visible chromatid break. In terms of the signal model, elevated conversion of dsb into chromatid breaks results from altered signalling and the disappearance of chromatid breaks with time following irradiation represents the completion of recombinational exchanges rather than repair of dsb.
Animals↗