Distributions of single nucleotide polymorphisms in differential chromosome segments of congenic resistant strains that define minor histocompatibility antigens
- 62 Downloads
Minor histocompatibility antigens (MiHAs) stimulate the rejection of allografts when donors and recipients are matched at the major histocompatibility complex (MHC). The majority of identified autosomal MiHAs were generated by non-synonymous (NS) substitutions that alter MHC class I-binding peptides. The mosaic distribution of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that distinguish inbred mouse strains led us to hypothesize that MiHA genes defined by congenic strains on C57BL/6 and C57BL/10 backgrounds map to chromosomal regions with relatively high numbers of NS SNPs that distinguish C57 strains from other common inbred strains. To test this hypothesis, we mapped the ends of differential chromosome segments of congenic strains, which define 12 MiHAs, relative to microsatellites and SNPs. The lengths of differential segments ranged from 9.7 to 105.9 Mbp in congenic strains where no attempts were made to select recombinants within these segments. There was no apparent correlation between differential segment length and number of backcrosses, suggesting that factors other than the number of opportunities for recombination affected the differential segment lengths in these congenics. These differential segments included higher numbers of NS SNPs that distinguish C57BL/6J from A/J, DBA/2J, and 129S1/J than would be predicted if these SNPs were uniformly distributed along the chromosomes. The most extreme case was the H8 congenic that included 74% of the SNPs on chromosome 14 within its 9.7–11.1 Mbp differential segment. These results point toward a direct relationship between the level of genomic divergence, as indicated by numbers of NS SNPs, and numbers of MiHAs that collectively determine the magnitude of allograft rejection.
KeywordsSingle nucleotide polymorphism Congenic strain Minor histocompatibility
This research was supported by a grant (AI-16052) from the National Institutes of Health. The authors gratefully acknowledge the technical assistance of Mr. Michael Strausbauch and the secretarial assistance of Ms. DeAnn Frederixon.
- Bailey DW (1973) Inbred strains of mice. Mouse Newsletter 49:27–31Google Scholar
- Gabriel SB, Schaffner SF, Nguyen H, Moore JM, Roy J, Blumenstiel B, Higgins J, DeFelice M, Lochner A, Faggart M, Liu-Cordero SN, Rotimi C, Adeyemo A, Cooper R, Ward R, Lander ES, Daly MJ, Altshuler D (2002) The structure of haplotype blocks in the human genome. Science 296:2225–2229PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Matise TC, Sachidanandam R, Clark AG, Kruglyak L, Wijsman E, Kakol J, Buyske S, Chui B, Cohen P, de Toma C, Ehm M, Glanowski S, He C, Heil J, Markianos K, McMullen I, Pericak-Vance MA, Silbergleit A, Stein L, Wagner M, Wilson AF, Winick JD, Winn-Deen ES, Yamashiro CT, Cann HM, Lai E, Holden AL (2003) A 3.9-centimorgan-resolution human single-nucleotide polymorphism linkage map and screening set. Am J Hum Genet 73:271–284PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Patil N, Berno AJ, Hinds DA, Barrett WA, Doshi JM, Hacker CR, Kautzer CR, Lee DH, Marjoribanks C, McDonough DP, Nguyen BTN, Norris MC, Sheehan JB, Shen N, Stern D, Stokowski RP, Thomas DJ, Trulson MO, Vyas KR, Frazer KA, Fodor SPA, Cox DR (2001) Blocks of limited haplotype diversity revealed by high-resolution scanning of human chromosome 21. Science 294:1719–1723PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Snell GD, Stimpfling JF (1966) Genetics of tissue transplantation. In: Green EL (ed) Biology of the laboratory mouse, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 205–224Google Scholar
- Wiltshire T, Pletcher MT, Batalov S, Barnes SW, Tarantino LM, Cooke MP, Wu H, Smylie K, Santrosyan A, Copeland NG, Jenkins NA, Kalush F, Mural RJ, Glynne RJ, Kay SA, Adams MD, Fletcher CF (2003) Genome-wide single-nucleotide polymorphism analysis defines haplotype patterns in mouse. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:3380–3385PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar