Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Errors in Chromosome Segregation During Oogenesis and Early Embryogenesis

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility

Abstract

Errors in chromosome segregation occurring during human oogenesis and early embryogenesis are very common. Meiotic chromosome development during oogenesis is subdivided into three distinct phases. The crucial events, including meiotic chromosome pairing and recombination, take place from around 11 weeks until birth. Oogenesis is then arrested until ovulation, when the first meiotic division takes place, with the second meiotic division not completed until after fertilization. It is generally accepted that most aneuploid fetal conditions, such as trisomy 21 Down syndrome, are due to maternal chromosome segregation errors. The underlying reasons are not yet fully understood. It is also clear that superimposed on the maternal meiotic chromosome segregation errors, there are a large number of mitotic errors taking place post-zygotically during the first few cell divisions in the embryo. In this chapter, we summarise current knowledge of errors in chromosome segregation during oogenesis and early embryogenesis, with special reference to the clinical implications for successful assisted reproduction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Bendsen E, Byskov AG, Andersen CY, Westergaard LG (2006) Number of germ cells and somatic cells in human fetal ovaries during the first weeks after sex differentiation. Hum Reprod 21(1):30-35

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Barlow AL, Hulten MA (1998) Crossing over analysis at pachytene in man. Eur J Hum Genet 6(4):350-358

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lenzi ML, Smith J, Snowden T et al (2005) Extreme heterogeneity in the molecular events leading to the establishment of chiasmata during meiosis I in human oocytes. Am J Hum Genet 76(1):112-127

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Tease C, Hartshorne G, Hulten M (2006) Altered patterns of meiotic recombination in human fetal oocytes with asynapsis and/or synaptonemal complex fragmentation at pachytene. Reprod Biomed Online 13(1):88-95

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Tease C, Hartshorne GM, Hulten MA (2002) Patterns of meiotic recombination in human fetal oocytes. Am J Hum Genet 70(6): 1469-1479

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Tease C, Hulten MA (2004) Inter-sex variation in synaptonemal complex lengths largely determine the different recombination rates in male and female germ cells. Cytogenet Genome Res 107(3-4):208-215

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Yuncken C (1968) Meiosis in the human female. Cytogenetics 7(3):234-238

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hunt PA, Hassold TJ (2008) Human female meiosis: what makes a good egg go bad? Trends Genet 24(2):86-93

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Oliver TR, Feingold E, Yu K et al (2008) New insights into human nondisjunction of chromosome 21 in oocytes. PLoS Genet 4(3):e1000033

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Jones KT (2008) Meiosis in oocytes: predisposition to aneuploidy and its increased incidence with age. Hum Reprod Update 14(2): 143-158

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Delhanty JD (2005) Mechanisms of aneuploidy induction in human oogenesis and early embryogenesis. Cytogenet Genome Res 111(3-4):237-244

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hultén MA, Patel S, Tankimanova M et al (2008) On the origin of trisomy 21 Down syndrome. Mol Cytogenet 1:21

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kovaleva NV (2007) Parental mosaicism for trisomy 21: problems with its detection and an approach to determining its population rate. Genet Test 11(3):341-344

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hall HE, Chan ER, Collins A et al (2007) The origin of trisomy 13. Am J Med Genet A 143A(19):2242-2248

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cupisti S, Conn CM, Fragouli E et al (2003) Sequential FISH analysis of oocytes and polar bodies reveals aneuploidy mechanisms. Prenat Diagn 23(8):663-668

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Dyban A, Freidine M, Severova E, Cieslak J, Ivakhnenko V, Verlinsky Y (1996) Detection of aneuploidy in human oocytes and corresponding first polar bodies by fluorescent in situ hybridization. J Assist Reprod Genet 13(1):73-78

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Mahmood R, Brierley CH, Faed MJ, Mills JA, Delhanty JD (2000) Mechanisms of maternal aneuploidy: FISH analysis of oocytes and polar bodies in patients undergoing assisted conception. Hum Genet 106(6):620-626

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Pellestor F, Andreo B, Arnal F, Humeau C, Demaille J (2003) Maternal aging and chromosomal abnormalities: new data drawn from in vitro unfertilized human oocytes. Hum Genet 112(2):195-203

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gras L, McBain J, Trounson A, Kola I (1992) The incidence of chromosomal aneuploidy in stimulated and unstimulated (natural) uninseminated human oocytes. Hum Reprod 7(10):1396-1401

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hassold T, Hunt P (2001) To err (meiotically) is human: the genesis of human aneuploidy. Nat Rev Genet 2(4):280-291

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Almeida PA, Bolton VN (1994) The relationship between chromosomal abnormalities in the human oocyte and fertilization in vitro. Hum Reprod 9(2):343-346

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Pellestor F, Andreo B, Arnal F, Humeau C, Demaille J (2002) Mechanisms of non-disjunction in human female meiosis: the co-existence of two modes of malsegregation evidenced by the karyotyping of 1397 in-vitro unfertilized oocytes. Hum Reprod 17(8):2134-2145

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Angell R (1997) First-meiotic-division nondisjunction in human oocytes. Am J Hum Genet 61(1):23-32

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Fragouli E, Wells D, Doshi A, Gotts S, Harper JC, Delhanty JD (2006) Complete cytogenetic investigation of oocytes from a young cancer patient with the use of comparative genomic hybridisation reveals meiotic errors. Prenat Diagn 26(1):71-76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sandalinas M, Marquez C, Munné S (2002) Spectral karyotyping of fresh, non-inseminated oocytes. Mol Hum Reprod 8(6):580-585

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kuliev A, Cieslak J, Verlinsky Y (2005) Frequency and distribution of chromosome abnormalities in human oocytes. Cytogenet Genome Res 111(3-4):193-198

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kuliev A, Cieslak J, Ilkevitch Y, Verlinsky Y (2003) Chromosomal abnormalities in a series of 6,733 human oocytes in preimplantation diagnosis for age-related aneuploidies. Reprod Biomed Online 6(1):54-59

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Pujol A, Boiso I, Benet J et al (2003) Analysis of nine chromosome probes in first polar bodies and metaphase II oocytes for the detection of aneuploidies. Eur J Hum Genet 11(4):325-336

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Cozzi J, Conn CM, Harper J et al (1999) A trisomic germ cell line and precocious chromatid segregation leads to recurrent trisomy 21 conception. Hum Genet 104(1):23-28

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Fragouli E, Wells D, Thornhill A et al (2006) Comparative genomic hybridization analysis of human oocytes and polar bodies. Hum Reprod 21(9):2319-2328

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Fragouli E, Wells D, Whalley KM, Mills JA, Faed MJ, Delhanty JD (2006) Increased susceptibility to maternal aneuploidy demonstrated by comparative genomic hybridization analysis of human MII oocytes and first polar bodies. Cytogenet Genome Res 14(1):30-38

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Gutierrez-Mateo C, Benet J, Wells D et al (2004) Aneuploidy study of human oocytes first polar body comparative genomic hybridization and metaphase II fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis. Hum Reprod 19(12):2859-2868

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Gutierrez-Mateo C, Wells D, Benet J et al (2004) Reliability of comparative genomic hybridization to detect chromosome abnormalities in first polar bodies and metaphase II oocytes. Hum Reprod 19(9):2118-2125

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Wells D, Escudero T, Levy B, Hirschhorn K, Delhanty JD, Munné S (2002) First clinical application of comparative genomic hybridization and polar body testing for preimplantation genetic diagnosis of aneuploidy. Fertil Steril 78(3):543-549

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Anahory T, Andreo B, Regnier-Vigouroux G et al (2003) Sequential multiple probe fluorescence in-situ hybridization analysis of human oocytes and polar bodies by combining centromeric labelling and whole chromosome painting. Mol Hum Reprod 9(10):577-585

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Munné S, Bahce M, Sandalinas M et al (2004) Differences in chromosome susceptibility to aneuploidy and survival to first trimester. Reprod Biomed Online 8(1):81-90

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Mantzouratou A, Mania A, Fragouli E et al (2007) Variable aneuploidy mechanisms in embryos from couples with poor reproductive histories undergoing preimplantation genetic screening. Hum Reprod 22(7):1844-1853

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Delhanty JD, Griffin DK, Handyside AH et al (1993) Detection of aneuploidy and chromosomal mosaicism in human embryos during preimplantation sex determination by fluorescent in situ hybridisation, (FISH). Hum Mol Genet 2(8):1183-1185

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Delhanty JD, Harper JC, Ao A, Handyside AH, Winston RM (1997) Multicolour FISH detects frequent chromosomal mosaicism and chaotic division in normal preimplantation embryos from fertile patients. Hum Genet 99(6):755-760

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Evsikov S, Verlinsky Y (1998) Mosaicism in the inner cell mass of human blastocysts. Hum Reprod 13(11):3151-3155

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Munné S, Cohen J (1998) Chromosome abnormalities in human embryos. Hum Reprod Update 4(6):842-855

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Munné S, Lee A, Rosenwaks Z, Grifo J, Cohen J (1993) Diagnosis of major chromosome aneuploidies in human preimplantation embryos. Hum Reprod 8(12):2185-2191

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Voullaire L, Slater H, Williamson R, Wilton L (2000) Chromosome analysis of blastomeres from human embryos by using comparative genomic hybridization. Hum Genet 106(2):210-217

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Wells D, Delhanty JD (2000) Comprehensive chromosomal analysis of human preimplantation embryos using whole genome amplification and single cell comparative genomic hybridization. Mol Hum Reprod 6(11):1055-1062

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Conn CM, Harper JC, Winston RM, Delhanty JD (1995) Preimplantation diagnosis for trisomies 13, 14, 18 and 21 using multicolour fluorescent in situ hybridisation. Am J Hum Genet 57(Suppl):A1611

    Google Scholar 

  46. Conn CM, Harper JC, Winston RM, Delhanty JD (1998) Infertile couples with Robertsonian translocations: preimplantation genetic analysis of embryos reveals chaotic cleavage divisions. Hum Genet 102(1):117-123

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Munné S, Fung J, Cassel MJ, Marquez C, Weier HU (1998) Preimplantation genetic analysis of translocations: case-specific probes for interphase cell analysis. Hum Genet 102(6):663-674

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Iwarsson E, Malmgren H, Inzunza J et al (2000) Highly abnormal cleavage divisions in preimplantation embryos from translocation carriers. Prenat Diagn 20(13):1038-1047

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Simopoulou M, Harper JC, Fragouli E et al (2003) Preimplantation genetic diagnosis of chromosome abnormalities: implications from the outcome for couples with chromosomal rearrangements. Prenat Diagn 23(8):652-662

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Delhanty JD, Handyside AH (1995) The origin of genetic defects in the human and their detection in the preimplantation embryo. Hum Reprod Update 1(3):201-215

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Voullaire L, Wilton L, McBain J, Callaghan T, Williamson R (2002) Chromosome abnormalities identified by comparative genomic hybridization in embryos from women with repeated implantation failure. Mol Hum Reprod 8(11):1035-1041

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Munné S, Bahce M, Schimmel T, Sadowy S, Cohen J (1998) Case report: chromatid exchange and predivision of chromatids as other sources of abnormal oocytes detected by preimplantation genetic diagnosis of translocations. Prenat Diagn 18(13):1450-1458

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Gianaroli L, Magli MC, Ferraretti AP, Fiorentino A, Garrisi J, Munné S (1997) Preimplantation genetic diagnosis increases the implantation rate in human in vitro fertilization by avoiding the transfer of chromosomally abnormal embryos. Fertil Steril 68(6):1128-1131

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Munné S (2005) Analysis of chromosome segregation during preimplantation genetic diagnosis in both male and female translocation heterozygotes. Cytogenet Genome Res 111(3-4):305-309

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Munné S, Fischer J, Warner A, Chen S, Zouves C, Cohen J (2006) Preimplantation genetic diagnosis significantly reduces pregnancy loss in infertile couples: a multicenter study. Fertil Steril 85(2):326-332

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Munné S, Magli C, Cohen J et al (1999) Positive outcome after preimplantation diagnosis of aneuploidy in human embryos. Hum Reprod 14(9):2191-2199

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Verlinsky Y, Tur-Kaspa I, Cieslak J et al (2005) Preimplantation testing for chromosomal disorders improves reproductive outcome of poor-prognosis patients. Reprod Biomed Online 11(2): 219-225

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Platteau P, Staessen C, Michiels A, Van Steirteghem A, Liebaers I, Devroey P (2005) Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy screening in women older than 37 years. Fertil Steril 84(2): 319-324

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van Echten-Arends J et al (2007) In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening. N Engl J Med 357(1):9-17

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Cohen J, Grifo JA (2007) Multicentre trial of preimplantation genetic screening reported in the New England Journal of Medicine: an in-depth look at the findings. Reprod Biomed Online 15(4):365-366

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Staessen C, Platteau P, Van Assche E et al (2004) Comparison of blastocyst transfer with or without preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy screening in couples with advanced maternal age: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 19(12):2849-2858

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Wilton L, Williamson R, McBain J, Edgar D, Voullaire L (2001) Birth of a healthy infant after preimplantation confirmation of euploidy by comparative genomic hybridization. N Engl J Med 345(21):1537-1541

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Sher G, Keskintepe L, Keskintepe M et al (2007) Oocyte karyotyping by comparative genomic hybridization provides a highly reliable method for selecting “competent” embryos, markedly improving in vitro fertilization outcome: a multiphase study. Fertil Steril 87(5):1033-1040

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Fragouli E, Delhanty JD, Wells D (2007) Single cell diagnosis using comparative genomic hybridization after preliminary DNA amplification still needs more tweaking: too many miscalls. Fertil Steril 88(1):247-248 author reply 8-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Hultén M, Tankimanova M, Baker H (2005) Meiosis and meiotic errors. In: Jorde LB, Little PFR, Dunn MJ, Subramaniam S (eds) Encyclopedia of genetics, proteomics and bioinformatics (online edition). John Wiley and Sons Ltd, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  66. Cheng EY, Hunt PA, Naluai-Cecchini TA, Fligner CL, Fujimoto VY, Pasternack TL, Schwartz JM, Steinauer JE, Woodruff TJ, Cherry SM, Hansen TA, Vallente RU, Broman KW, Hassold TJ. (2009) PLoS Genet. 5(9):e1000661. Epub 2009 Sep 18

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Hultén M, Patel S, Jonasson J, Iwarsson E. (2009) Reproduction. [Epub ahead of print]PMID: 19755486 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, Coventry, England

    Maj Hultén

  2. Department of Biological Sciences, University of Warwick, Coventry, England

    Edward Smith

  3. UCL Centre for PGD, Obstetrics & Gynecology, University College London, Gower Street, London, England

    Joy Delhanty

Authors
  1. Maj Hultén
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Edward Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Joy Delhanty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maj Hultén .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Medicine, University of Utah, Arapeen Dr. 675, Salt Lake City, 84108, USA

    Douglas T. Carrell

  2. School of Medicine, University of Utah, North Medical Drive 50, Salt Lake City, 84132, USA

    C. Matthew Peterson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hultén, M., Smith, E., Delhanty, J. (2010). Errors in Chromosome Segregation During Oogenesis and Early Embryogenesis. In: Carrell, D., Peterson, C. (eds) Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1436-1_20

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1436-1_20

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-1435-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-1436-1

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation