Parental genomes segregate into distinct blastomeres during multipolar zygotic divisions leading to mixoploid and chimeric blastocysts.
Chimerism
Chromosomal instability
Heterogoneic division
Mitosis
Mixoploidy
Mola
Multipolar division
Triploidy
Whole-genome segregation errors
Zygote
Journal
Genome biology
ISSN: 1474-760X
Titre abrégé: Genome Biol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100960660
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 10 2022
03 10 2022
Historique:
received:
01
02
2022
accepted:
31
08
2022
entrez:
2
10
2022
pubmed:
3
10
2022
medline:
5
10
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
During normal zygotic division, two haploid parental genomes replicate, unite and segregate into two biparental diploid blastomeres. Contrary to this fundamental biological tenet, we demonstrate here that parental genomes can segregate to distinct blastomeres during the zygotic division resulting in haploid or uniparental diploid and polyploid cells, a phenomenon coined heterogoneic division. By mapping the genomic landscape of 82 blastomeres from 25 bovine zygotes, we show that multipolar zygotic division is a tell-tale of whole-genome segregation errors. Based on the haplotypes and live-imaging of zygotic divisions, we demonstrate that various combinations of androgenetic, gynogenetic, diploid, and polyploid blastomeres arise via distinct parental genome segregation errors including the formation of additional paternal, private parental, or tripolar spindles, or by extrusion of paternal genomes. Hence, we provide evidence that private parental spindles, if failing to congress before anaphase, can lead to whole-genome segregation errors. In addition, anuclear blastomeres are common, indicating that cytokinesis can be uncoupled from karyokinesis. Dissociation of blastocyst-stage embryos further demonstrates that whole-genome segregation errors might lead to mixoploid or chimeric development in both human and cow. Yet, following multipolar zygotic division, fewer embryos reach the blastocyst stage and diploidization occurs frequently indicating that alternatively, blastomeres with genome-wide errors resulting from whole-genome segregation errors can be selected against or contribute to embryonic arrest. Heterogoneic zygotic division provides an overarching paradigm for the development of mixoploid and chimeric individuals and moles and can be an important cause of embryonic and fetal arrest following natural conception or IVF.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
During normal zygotic division, two haploid parental genomes replicate, unite and segregate into two biparental diploid blastomeres.
RESULTS
Contrary to this fundamental biological tenet, we demonstrate here that parental genomes can segregate to distinct blastomeres during the zygotic division resulting in haploid or uniparental diploid and polyploid cells, a phenomenon coined heterogoneic division. By mapping the genomic landscape of 82 blastomeres from 25 bovine zygotes, we show that multipolar zygotic division is a tell-tale of whole-genome segregation errors. Based on the haplotypes and live-imaging of zygotic divisions, we demonstrate that various combinations of androgenetic, gynogenetic, diploid, and polyploid blastomeres arise via distinct parental genome segregation errors including the formation of additional paternal, private parental, or tripolar spindles, or by extrusion of paternal genomes. Hence, we provide evidence that private parental spindles, if failing to congress before anaphase, can lead to whole-genome segregation errors. In addition, anuclear blastomeres are common, indicating that cytokinesis can be uncoupled from karyokinesis. Dissociation of blastocyst-stage embryos further demonstrates that whole-genome segregation errors might lead to mixoploid or chimeric development in both human and cow. Yet, following multipolar zygotic division, fewer embryos reach the blastocyst stage and diploidization occurs frequently indicating that alternatively, blastomeres with genome-wide errors resulting from whole-genome segregation errors can be selected against or contribute to embryonic arrest.
CONCLUSIONS
Heterogoneic zygotic division provides an overarching paradigm for the development of mixoploid and chimeric individuals and moles and can be an important cause of embryonic and fetal arrest following natural conception or IVF.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36184650
doi: 10.1186/s13059-022-02763-2
pii: 10.1186/s13059-022-02763-2
pmc: PMC9528162
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
201Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Clin Genet. 1982 May;21(5):309-14
pubmed: 7116675
Clin Genet. 2017 Jun;91(6):849-858
pubmed: 27883173
J Med Genet. 1993 Nov;30(11):966-7
pubmed: 8301657
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1962 Mar 15;48:332-5
pubmed: 13897101
Eur J Med Genet. 2008 Nov-Dec;51(6):573-9
pubmed: 18706534
Sex Dev. 2018;12(1-3):145-154
pubmed: 28926831
Eur J Med Genet. 2011 May-Jun;54(3):374-5
pubmed: 21252005
Fertil Steril. 2019 Feb;111(2):280-293
pubmed: 30691630
Sex Dev. 2007;1(1):59-65
pubmed: 18391516
J Cell Biol. 2021 Nov 1;220(11):
pubmed: 34550316
Hum Mol Genet. 2010 Apr 1;19(7):1263-75
pubmed: 20053666
Hum Reprod. 2003 Feb;18(2):236-42
pubmed: 12571155
Am J Med Genet A. 2012 Sep;158A(9):2119-23
pubmed: 22821914
Nat Med. 2009 May;15(5):577-83
pubmed: 19396175
Cell. 2007 Aug 10;130(3):484-98
pubmed: 17693257
N Engl J Med. 2019 Feb 28;380(9):842-849
pubmed: 30811910
Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Aug;124(2 Pt 1):202-209
pubmed: 25004334
Genome Res. 2019 Mar;29(3):367-382
pubmed: 30683754
Hum Genet. 1992 Feb;88(4):367-75
pubmed: 1740312
Prenat Diagn. 1993 Aug;13(8):723-40
pubmed: 8284290
Biochim Biophys Acta. 2012 Dec;1822(12):1921-30
pubmed: 22771499
Cytogenetics. 1970;9(4):245-59
pubmed: 5529036
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Nov 16;118(46):
pubmed: 34772814
Hum Reprod. 2002 Feb;17(2):413-9
pubmed: 11821287
Am J Med Genet A. 2005 Oct 1;138A(2):171-4
pubmed: 16152633
Genome Res. 2016 May;26(5):567-78
pubmed: 27197242
Am J Med Genet A. 2013 Jan;161A(1):13-20
pubmed: 23239666
Hum Reprod. 2005 Mar;20(3):665-71
pubmed: 15591086
Biol Reprod. 1994 Sep;51(3):373-9
pubmed: 7803609
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019 Jan;36(1):165-172
pubmed: 30246223
Hum Reprod. 1991 Jan;6(1):17-24
pubmed: 1874952
J Cell Sci. 2008 Feb 1;121(Pt 3):306-16
pubmed: 18198185
Fertil Steril. 2009 Jun;91(6):2355-60
pubmed: 18554589
Biol Reprod. 2003 Nov;69(5):1707-13
pubmed: 12890737
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1988 Dec;29(4):299-304
pubmed: 3229544
Physiol Res. 2012;61(5):513-25
pubmed: 22881225
PLoS Genet. 2015 Oct 22;11(10):e1005601
pubmed: 26491874
J Hum Genet. 2018 Jul;63(7):803-810
pubmed: 29636544
Prenat Diagn. 2021 Apr;41(5):554-563
pubmed: 33524193
Biol Reprod. 1987 Sep;37(2):395-401
pubmed: 3676394
Mol Biol Evol. 1987 Jul;4(4):406-25
pubmed: 3447015
Eur J Hum Genet. 2013 Jul;21(7):788-91
pubmed: 23188046
Hum Reprod. 1992 Jun;7 Suppl 1:89-94
pubmed: 1447374
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013 Jun;30(5):703-10
pubmed: 23585186
Am J Med Genet. 1994 Sep 1;52(3):324-30
pubmed: 7810564
Fertil Steril. 2010 Feb;93(2):364-73
pubmed: 19249029
Am J Med Genet A. 2019 Nov;179(11):2252-2256
pubmed: 31373173
Fertil Steril. 2016 Nov;106(6):1414-1419.e5
pubmed: 27692437
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1991 Jun 1;88(11):4806-10
pubmed: 2052559
Hum Reprod. 2005 Mar;20(3):672-82
pubmed: 15689349
Fertil Steril. 2002 Dec;78(6):1248-53
pubmed: 12477520
Bioinformatics. 2014 Oct;30(19):2811-2
pubmed: 24930139
Nat Commun. 2016 Mar 29;7:11165
pubmed: 27021558
J Med Genet. 2010 Oct;47(10):651-8
pubmed: 19858130
Hum Mutat. 2011 Jul;32(7):783-93
pubmed: 21412953
Hum Genet. 2017 Jul;136(7):805-819
pubmed: 28393271
Nucleic Acids Res. 2017 Feb 28;45(4):e18
pubmed: 28204566
PLoS One. 2016 Dec 1;11(12):e0166398
pubmed: 27907016
Biol Reprod. 1996 Aug;55(2):271-80
pubmed: 8828829
Dev Biol. 1994 Mar;162(1):29-40
pubmed: 8125194
Animals (Basel). 2021 Jan 23;11(2):
pubmed: 33498673
Reprod Biomed Online. 2019 Mar;38(3):330-339
pubmed: 30639160
Hum Reprod. 1997 Oct;12(10):2257-62
pubmed: 9402291
Nat Commun. 2012;3:1251
pubmed: 23212380
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2014 Jun 20;12:54
pubmed: 24951056
Biol Reprod. 1996 Aug;55(2):260-70
pubmed: 8828828
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1985;442:88-95
pubmed: 3860066
Science. 2015 Apr 10;348(6231):235-8
pubmed: 25859044
Am J Med Genet A. 2010 Sep;152A(9):2277-86
pubmed: 20803645
Syst Biol Reprod Med. 2017 Jun;63(3):206-208
pubmed: 28306341
Sci Adv. 2020 Apr 15;6(16):eaaz7602
pubmed: 32494621
J Assist Reprod Genet. 1996 Oct;13(9):739-44
pubmed: 8947825
Genome Res. 2021 Sep;31(9):1519-1530
pubmed: 34330789
J Med Genet. 2006 Feb;43(2):187-92
pubmed: 15908568
Hum Reprod. 2017 Nov 1;32(11):2348-2357
pubmed: 29040498
Sci Rep. 2017 Aug 29;7(1):9744
pubmed: 28851957
Am J Hum Genet. 2000 Jun;66(6):1807-20
pubmed: 10801385
Theriogenology. 2010 Mar 1;73(4):421-8
pubmed: 19962181
J Med Genet. 2010 Nov;47(11):782-5
pubmed: 20685670
BMC Bioinformatics. 2009 Oct 27;10:356
pubmed: 19860910
Eur J Med Genet. 2020 Sep;63(9):103971
pubmed: 32565253
Eur J Med Genet. 2020 Feb;63(2):103741
pubmed: 31445143
Cell. 2011 Aug 19;146(4):568-81
pubmed: 21854982
Cell. 2021 May 27;184(11):2860-2877.e22
pubmed: 33964210
Clin Epigenetics. 2017 Oct 13;9:111
pubmed: 29046733
Am J Hum Genet. 1998 Apr;62(4):937-40
pubmed: 9529354
Nat Med. 1995 Jan;1(1):47-52
pubmed: 7584952
Reprod Biomed Online. 2004 Apr;8(4):454-9
pubmed: 15149570
Hum Reprod Update. 2019 Jan 1;25(1):15-33
pubmed: 30395265
Mol Cytogenet. 2014 Feb 28;7(1):16
pubmed: 24581244
Anim Reprod Sci. 2018 Aug;195:284-290
pubmed: 29907333
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2003 Aug;20(8):309-13
pubmed: 12948092
Reprod Fertil Dev. 1999;11(4-5):273-9
pubmed: 10898292
Am J Hum Genet. 2015 Jun 4;96(6):894-912
pubmed: 25983246
Prenat Diagn. 2015 Nov;35(11):1117-27
pubmed: 26213308
Eur J Hum Genet. 2011 Oct;19(10):1026-31
pubmed: 21654731
Cytogenet Cell Genet. 1986;42(1-2):1-7
pubmed: 3720355
J Assist Reprod Genet. 1992 Feb;9(1):68-76
pubmed: 1617254
Hum Reprod. 2018 Dec 1;33(12):2302-2311
pubmed: 30383227
Prenat Diagn. 2005 Nov;25(11):1048-56
pubmed: 16231321
Dev Growth Differ. 1997 Oct;39(5):607-15
pubmed: 9338596
Brief Bioinform. 2019 Jul 19;20(4):1160-1166
pubmed: 28968734
Hum Reprod Update. 2020 Apr 15;26(3):313-334
pubmed: 32141501
Fertil Steril. 2014 Jun;101(6):1637-48.e1-5
pubmed: 24726214
Hum Reprod. 2017 Mar 1;32(3):687-697
pubmed: 28158716
Science. 2018 Jul 13;361(6398):189-193
pubmed: 30002254
Theriogenology. 2010 Apr 1;73(6):828-37
pubmed: 20097414
Clin Genet. 2002 Nov;62(5):376-82
pubmed: 12431252
J Hum Genet. 2020 Aug;65(8):705-709
pubmed: 32277176
NPJ Genom Med. 2021 Oct 7;6(1):81
pubmed: 34620870
Hum Reprod. 2007 Apr;22(4):1114-22
pubmed: 17185351
Am J Med Genet A. 2015 Oct;167A(10):2463-9
pubmed: 26219535
Theriogenology. 2019 Feb;125:249-258
pubmed: 30476758
Clin Genet. 2006 Nov;70(5):363-73
pubmed: 17026615
Hum Reprod. 2020 Mar 27;35(3):727-733
pubmed: 32155260
Bioessays. 2017 Apr;39(4):
pubmed: 28247957
Fertil Steril. 2017 Jul;108(1):62-71.e8
pubmed: 28579407
J Reprod Dev. 2010 Apr;56(2):200-7
pubmed: 20035110
Hum Reprod Update. 2014 Jul-Aug;20(4):571-81
pubmed: 24667481
Fertil Steril. 2000 Aug;74(2):295-8
pubmed: 10927047
Fertil Steril. 2012 Dec;98(6):1458-63
pubmed: 22925687
Fertil Steril. 2019 Jan;111(1):69-76
pubmed: 30424882
Clin Dysmorphol. 2014 Apr;23(2):56-59
pubmed: 24487971
Anim Reprod Sci. 2008 Aug;107(1-2):131-47
pubmed: 17681437
Hum Mol Genet. 2018 Jul 15;27(14):2573-2585
pubmed: 29688390
NAR Genom Bioinform. 2019 Oct 24;2(1):lqz011
pubmed: 33575563
Theriogenology. 2021 May;166:55-63
pubmed: 33689928
Nat Genet. 1995 Oct;11(2):164-9
pubmed: 7550344
Fertil Steril. 1995 Jun;63(6):1246-50
pubmed: 7750595
Nat Commun. 2020 Jun 11;11(1):2958
pubmed: 32528010
Prenat Diagn. 2003 Jul;23(7):529-34
pubmed: 12868076
Reproduction. 2014 Nov;148(5):519-29
pubmed: 25118302
Cell Stem Cell. 2019 Nov 7;25(5):697-712.e6
pubmed: 31588047
Fertil Steril. 2018 Jan;109(1):77-83
pubmed: 29191449