Human Genetics

, Volume 133, Issue 4, pp 417–424 | Cite as

Turner syndrome revisited: review of new data supports the hypothesis that all viable 45,X cases are cryptic mosaics with a rescue cell line, implying an origin by mitotic loss

  • Ernest B. Hook
  • Dorothy Warburton
Review Paper


We review the data pertinent to the hypothesis we proposed three decades ago, that all embryos that survive gestation as women with Turner syndrome and have an ostensibly non-mosaic 45,X karyotype, actually are cryptic mosaics for a “rescue line” that includes a viable karyotype. Reanalysis of the prevalence and frequency of 45,X in available data on spontaneous abortuses, and livebirths, confirms prior estimates that 1 % to 1.5 % of all recognizable pregnancies start as an apparent non-mosaic 45,X but about 99 % do not survive gestation. From the rates of 45,X in early embryos, which are notably higher than the inferred rate of gametes hypohaploid for a sex chromosome, as well as the negative maternal age association with 45,X of maternal origin we deduce, in agreement with but on independent grounds from Hall et al. (2006), that a very large proportion of 45,X embryos acquired their 45,X line after fertilization. Results of a search for mosaic cell lines in patients with “Turner syndrome” in several reports indicate that not only does the detection rate of a mosaic line depend upon the number and sensitivity of the markers used, and the number of different tissues examined, but also upon the severity of the phenotype of those cases studied, and the number of cells karyotyped initially. Such factors may explain variation in the extent of detected “cryptic” mosaicism in 45,X individuals (currently at least 50 %). We note a report by Urbach and Benvenitsy (2009) of a gene necessary for placental function, PSF2RA, which lies in the pseudoautosomal-one region of the X and Y chromosomes. Deletion of such a gene could account for the high embryonic lethality in 45,X conceptions, and a rescue line in the placenta could account for embryonic and fetal survival of those cases in which a cryptic mosaic line cannot be found in the usual studies of blood and other tissues from affected individuals. Our primary conclusions are 1) all 45,X individuals with Turner syndrome are cryptic mosaics, 2) absence of the X chromosome in 45,X embryos is caused primarily by mitotic factors, and 3) the placenta is a strong candidate for the location of the rescue line in apparently non-mosaic 45,X individuals.


Turner Syndrome Turner Syndrome Patient Rescue Line SHOX Gene Buccal Tissue 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Canki N, Warburton D, Byrne J (1988) Morphological characteristics of monosomy X in spontaneous abortions. Ann Genet 31:4–13PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Carothers AD, Collyer S, De Mey R, Frackewicz A (1978) Parental age and birth order in the aetiology of some sex chromosome aneuploidies. Ann Hum Genet 41:277–287PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. De Braekeleer MT, Dao TN (1991) Cytogenetics of human spontaneous abortions. In: Hafez E (ed) Assisted human reproductive technology. Hemisphere Publishing Corporation, New York, pp 41–46Google Scholar
  4. Ellison JW, Wardak Z, Young MF, Robey PG, Webster M, Chiong W (1997) PHOG, a candidate gene for involvement in the short stature of Turner syndrome. Hum Molec Genet 6:1341–1347Google Scholar
  5. Ferguson-Smith MA (1965) Karyotype-phenotype correlations in gonadal dysgenesis and their bearing on the pathogenesis of malformations. J Med Genet 2:142–155PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fragouli E, Alfarawati S, Spath K, Jaroudi S, Sarasa J, Enciso M, Wells D (2013) The origin and impact of embryonic aneuploidy. Hum Genet 132:1001–1013PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Freriks K, Timmers HJ, Netea-Maier RT, Beerendonk CC, Otten BJ, van Alfen-van der Velden JA, Traas MA, Mieloo H, van de Zande GW, Hoefsloot LH, Hermus AR, Smeets DF (2013) Buccal cell FISH and blood PCR-Y detect high rates of X chromosomal mosaicism and Y chromosomal derivatives in patients with Turner syndrome. Eur J Med Genet 56:497–501PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gardner RJM, Sutherland GR, Shaffer LG (2012) Chromosome abnormalities and genetic counseling. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  9. Guttenbach M, Engel W, Schmid M (1997) Analysis of structural and numerical chromosome abnormalities in sperm of normal men and carriers of constitutional chromosome aberrations. Hum Genet 100:1–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hall H, Hunt P, Hassold T (2006) Meiosis and sex chromosome aneuploidy: how meiotic errors cause aneuploidy; how aneuploidy causes meiotic errors. Curr Opin Genet Dev 16:323–329PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hassold T, Chen N, Funkhouser J, Jooss T, Manuel B, Matsuura J, Matsuyama A, Wilson C, Yamane J, Jacobs PA (1980) A cytogenetic study of 1000 spontaneous abortions. Ann Hum Genet 44:151–164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hassold T, Warburton D, Kline J, Stein Z (1984) The relationship of maternal age and trisomy among trisomic spontaneous abortions. Am J Hum Genet 36:1349–1356PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Hassold T, Benham F, Leppert M (1988) Cytogenetic and molecular analysis of sex-chromosome monosomy. Am J Hum Genet 42:534–541PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Hassold T, Pettay D, Robinson A, Uchida I (1992) Molecular studies of parental origin and mosaicism in 45, X conceptuses. Hum Genet 89:647–652PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hennekam RCM, Krantz ID, Allanson JE (2010) “Turner syndrome”, in Gorlin’s syndromes of the head and neck. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  16. Hook EB (1977) Exclusion of chromosomal mosaicism: tables of 90%, 95% and 99% confidence limits and comments on use. Am J Hum Genet 29:94–97PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Hook EB, Warburton D (1983) The distribution of chromosomal genotypes associated with Turner’s syndrome: livebirth prevalence rates and evidence for diminished fetal mortality and severity in genotypes associated with structural X abnormalities or mosaicism. Hum Genet 64:24–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hsu LY (1984) Prenatal diagnosis of 45, X/46, XY mosaicism—a review and update. Prenat Diag 9:31–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jacobs PA, Betts PR, Cockwell AE, Crolla JA, Mackenzie MJ, Robinson DO, Youings S (1990) A cytogenetic and molecular reappraisal of a series of patients with Turner’s syndrome. Ann Hum Genet 54:209–223PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jacobs P, Dalton P, James R, Mosse K, Power M, Robinson D, Skuse D (1997) Turner syndrome: a cytogenetic and molecular study. Ann Hum Genet 61:471–483PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jones KL (2006) Smith’s recognizable patterns of human malformation. Elsevier-Saunders, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  22. Kline J, Stein Z, Susser M (1989) Conception to birth: epidemiology of prenatal development. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Maeda T, Ohno M, Matsunobu A, Yoshihara K, Yabe N (1991) A cytogenetic survey of 14,835 consecutive liveborns. Jap J Hum Genet 36:117–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Martin RH (1983) A detailed method for obtaining preparations of human-sperm chromosomes. Cytogenet Cell Genet 35:252–256PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Migeon BR (2014) Females are mosaics: X-inactivation and sex differences in disease. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  26. Nielsen J, Wohlert M (1991) Chromosome abnormalities found among 34910 newborn children: results from a 13-year incidence study in Arhus, Denmark. Hum Genet 87:81–83PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Templado C, Vidal F, Estop A (2011) Aneuploidy in human spermatozoa. Cytogenet Genome Res 133:91–99PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Urbach A, Benevisty N (2009) Studying early lethality of 45, XO (Turner’s syndrome) embryos using human embryonic stem cells. PLoS One 4:e4175PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Warburton D, Fraser FC (1964) Spontaneous abortion risks in man: data from reproductive histories collected in a medical genetics unit. Am J Hum Genet 16:1–25PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Warburton D, Kline J, Stein Z, Susser M (1980) Monosomy X: a chromosomal anomaly associated with young maternal age. Lancet 1:167–169PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Warburton D, Canki N, Byrne J (1991) Chromosome anomalies and prenatal development: an atlas. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Public HealthUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA
  2. 2.Department of PediatricsUniversity of CaliforniaSan FranciscoUSA
  3. 3.Department of Genetics and DevelopmentColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA
  4. 4.Department of PediatricsColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations