Repair in Fertilized Eggs of Mice and its Role in the Production of Chromosomal Aberrations

  • Walderico M. Generoso
Part of the Basic Life Sciences book series (BLSC, volume 15)


The fertilized egg may influence the yield of dominant-lethal mutations produced from chemical treatment of male postmeiotic germ cells to a small or large extent depending upon the mutagen used and the competence of the egg to repair the premutational lesions induced. The strain of females has little influence on the yield of dominant-lethal mutations induced by triethylenemelamine or ethyl methane-sulfonate in spermatids and spermatozoa, but it has a large influence in the case of isopropyl methanesulfonate. In addition to this difference, triethylenemelamine and ethyl methanesulfonate induce high levels of heritable translocations at these germ cell stages whereas isopropyl methanesulfonate is practically ineffective, even though doses of these chemicals produced comparable levels of dominant-lethal mutations. These differences between ethyl methanesulfonate and triethylenemelamine on one hand and isopropyl methanesulfonate on the other were hypothesized to be a function of the types of chromosomal lesions present at the time of repair activity and whether or not chromosomal aberrations were already fixed at the time of postfertilization pronuclear DNA synthesis.


Germ Cell Chromosomal Aberration Genetic Lesion Ethyl Methanesulfonate Dominant Lethality 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bürki, K., and W. Sheridan, Expression of TEM-induced damage to postmeiotic stages of spermatogenesis of the mouse during early embryogenesis. II. Cytological investigations, Mutat. Res., 52 (1978) 107–115.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Generoso, W. M., K. T. Cain, S. W. Huff, and D. G. Gosslee, Inducibility by chemical mutagens of heritable translocations in male and female germ cells of mice, In: Advances in Modern Toxicology, Vol. 5, W. G. Flamm and M. A. Mehlman, Eds., Hemisphere Publishing Co., Washington, D.C., 1978, pp. 109–129.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Generoso, W. M., K. T. Cain, M. Krishna, and S. W. Huff, Repair in the egg of chemically induced genetic lesions in spermatozoa and spermatids of mice, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. (U.S.), 56 (1979) 435–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Generoso, W. M., S. W. Huff, and S. K. Stout, Chemically induced dominant-lethal mutations and cell killing in mouse oocytes in the advanced stages of follicular development, Mutat. Res., 11 (1971) 411–420.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Generoso, W. M., S. W. Huff, and K. T. Cain, Relative rates at which dominant-lethal mutations and heritable translocations were induced by alkylating chemicals in postmeiotic male germ cells of mice, Genetics, 93 (1979) 163–171.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Generoso, W. M., W. L. Russell, S. W. Huff, S. K. Stout, and D. G. Gosslee, Effects of dose on the induction of dominantlethal mutants and heritable translocations with ethyl methanesulfonate in male mice, Genetics, 77 (1974) 741–752.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lemontt, J., Genetic and physiological factors affecting repair and mutagenesis in yeast, This volume, p. 85.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pedersen, R. A., and B. Brandriff, Radiation and drug-induced DNA repair in mammalian oocytes and embryos, This volume, p. 389.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Russell, W. L., Radiation and chemical mutagenesis and repair in mice, In: Molecules and Cellular Processes, R. F. Beers, Jr., R. M. Herriott and R. C. Tilghman, Eds., John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1972, pp. 239–247.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sega, G. A., Relationship between unscheduled DNA synthesis and mutation induction in male mice, This volume, p. 373.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Smith, P. D., R. D. Snyder, and R. L. Dusenbery, Isolation and characterization of repair-deficient mutants of Drosophila melanogaster, This volume, p. 175.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Swift, M., and C. Chase, Cancer in families with xeroderma pigmentosum, J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 62 (1979) 1415–1421.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Swift, M., L. Sholman, M. Perry, and C. Chase, Malignant neoplasms in the families of patients with ataxiatelangiectasia, Cancer Res., 36 (1976) 209–215.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • Walderico M. Generoso
    • 1
  1. 1.Biology DivisionOak Ridge National LaboratoryOak RidgeUSA

Personalised recommendations