Mendelian Genetics 1: Mendelian Genetics

Mendelian Genetics

Johann Gregor Mendel (1822–1884) (Figure 5.1) was a lifelong learner, teacher, scientist, and man of faith. As a young adult, he joined the Augustinian Abbey of St. Thomas in Brno in what is now the Czech Republic. Supported by the monastery, he taught physics, botany, and natural science courses at the secondary and university levels. In 1856, he began a decade-long research pursuit involving inheritance patterns in honeybees and plants, ultimately settling on pea plants as his primary model system (a system with convenient characteristics used to study a specific biological phenomenon to be applied to other systems). In 1865, Mendel presented the results of his experiments with nearly 30,000 pea plants to the local Natural History Society. He demonstrated that traits are transmitted from parents to offspring independently of other traits and in dominant and recessive patterns. In 1866, he published his work, Experiments in Plant Hybridization, in the proceedings of the Natural History Society of Brünn (Mendel, 1866). 

Mendel’s work went virtually unnoticed by the scientific community, which believed, incorrectly, that the process of inheritance involved a blending of parental traits that produced an intermediate physical appearance in offspring. The blending theory of inheritance asserted that the original parental traits were lost or absorbed by the blending in the offspring, but we now know that this is not the case. This hypothetical process appeared to be correct because of what we know now as continuous variation. Continuous variation results from the action of many genes to determine a characteristic like human height. Offspring appear to be a “blend” of their parents’ traits.

Instead of continuous characteristics, Mendel worked with traits that were inherited in distinct classes (specifically, violet versus white flowers); this is referred to as discontinuous variation. Mendel’s choice of these kinds of traits allowed him to see experimentally that the traits were not blended in the offspring, nor were they absorbed, but rather that they kept their distinctness and could be passed on. In 1868, Mendel became abbot of the monastery and exchanged his scientific pursuits for his pastoral duties. He was not recognised for his extraordinary scientific contributions during his lifetime. In fact, it was not until 1900 that his work was rediscovered, reproduced, and revitalised by scientists on the brink of discovering the chromosomal basis of heredity.

Mendel’s Historical Experiments

Mendel’s seminal work was accomplished using the garden pea, Pisum sativum, to study inheritance. This species naturally self-fertilises, meaning that pollen encounters ova within the same flower. Because every pea plant has both male reproductive organs and female reproductive organs, each plant produces both types of gametes required for reproduction—both pollen and ova. In plants, just as in animals, reproductive organs are classified by the size of the gametes produced. The organs producing the smaller pollen are called male reproductive organs, while the organs producing the larger ova are called female reproductive organs.

In garden peas, the flower petals remain sealed tightly until pollination is completed to prevent the pollination of other plants. The result is highly inbred, or “true-breeding,” pea plants. These are plants that always produce offspring that look like the parent. By experimenting with true-breeding pea plants, Mendel avoided the appearance of unexpected traits in offspring that might occur if the plants were not true-breeding. The garden pea also grows to maturity within one season, meaning that several generations could be evaluated over a relatively short time. Finally, large quantities of garden peas could be cultivated simultaneously, allowing Mendel to conclude that his results did not come about simply by chance.

Mendel performed hybridisations, which involve mating two true-breeding individuals that have different traits. In the pea, which is naturally self-pollinating, this is done by manually transferring pollen from the anther of a mature pea plant of one variety to the stigma of a separate mature pea plant of the second variety.

Plants used in first-generation crosses were called P, or parental generation, plants (Figure 5.2). Mendel collected the seeds produced by the P plants that resulted from each cross and grew them the following season. These offspring were called the F₁, or the first filial (filial = daughter or son), generation. Once Mendel examined the characteristics in the F₁ generation of plants, he allowed them to self-fertilise naturally. He then collected and grew the seeds from the F1 plants to produce the F₂, or second filial, generation. Mendel’s experiments extended beyond the F₂ generation to the F₃ generation, F₄ generation, and so on, but it was the ratio of characteristics in the P, F₁, and F₂ generations that were the most intriguing and became the basis of Mendel’s postulates.

In his 1865 publication, Mendel reported the results of his crosses involving seven different characteristics, each with two contrasting traits. A trait is defined as a variation in the physical appearance of a heritable characteristic. The characteristics included plant height, seed texture, seed colour, flower colour, pea-pod size, pea-pod colour, and flower position. For the characteristic of flower colour, for example, the two contrasting traits were white versus violet. To fully examine each characteristic, Mendel generated large numbers of F₁ and F₂ plants and reported results from thousands of F₂ plants.

In his crosses for flower colour, Mendel first confirmed that he was using plants that bred true for white or violet flower colour. Irrespective of the number of generations that Mendel examined, all self-crossed offspring of parents with white flowers had white flowers, and all self-crossed offspring of parents with violet flowers had violet flowers. In addition, Mendel confirmed that, other than flower colour, the pea plants were physically identical. This was an important check to make sure that the two varieties of pea plants only differed with respect to one trait, flower colour.

Once these validations were complete, Mendel applied the pollen from a plant with violet flowers to the stigma of a plant with white flowers. After gathering and sowing the seeds that resulted from this cross, Mendel found that 100 percent of the F₁ hybrid generation had violet flowers. Conventional wisdom at that time would have predicted the hybrid flowers to be pale violet or for hybrid plants to have equal numbers of white and violet flowers. In other words, the contrasting parental traits were expected to blend in the offspring. Instead, Mendel’s results demonstrated that the white flower trait had completely disappeared in the F₁ generation.

Importantly, Mendel did not stop his experimentation there. He allowed the F₁ plants to self-fertilise and found that 705 plants in the F₂ generation had violet flowers and 224 had white flowers. This was a ratio of 3.15 violet flowers to one white flower, or approximately 3:1. Mendel performed an additional experiment to ascertain differences in inheritance of traits carried in the pollen versus the ovum. When Mendel transferred pollen from a plant with violet flowers to fertilise the ova of a plant with white flowers and vice versa, he obtained approximately the same ratio irrespective of which gamete contributed which trait. This is called a reciprocal cross—a paired cross in which the respective traits of the male and female in one cross become the respective traits of the female and male in the other cross. For the other six characteristics that Mendel examined, the F₁ and F₂ generations behaved in the same way that they behaved for flower colour. One of the two traits would disappear completely from the F₁ generation, only to reappear in the F₂ generation at a ratio of roughly 3:1 (Figure 5.3).

Genotype and Phenotype

Two alleles for a given gene in a diploid organism are expressed and interact to produce physical characteristics. The observable traits expressed by an organism are referred to as its phenotype. An organism’s underlying genetic makeup, consisting of both physically visible and non-expressed alleles, is called its genotype. Mendel’s hybridization experiments demonstrate the difference between phenotype and genotype. When true-breeding plants in which one parent had yellow pods and one had green pods were cross-fertilised, all of the F₁ hybrid offspring had yellow pods. That is, the hybrid offspring were phenotypically identical to the true-breeding parent with yellow pods. However, we know that the allele donated by the parent with green pods was not simply lost because it reappeared in some of the F₂ offspring. Therefore, the F1 plants must have been genotypically different from the parent with yellow pods.

The P₁  plants that Mendel used in his experiments were each homozygous for the trait he was studying. Diploid organisms that are homozygous at a given gene, or locus, have two identical alleles for that gene on their homologous chromosomes. Mendel’s parental pea plants always bred true because both of the gametes produced carried the same trait. When P1 plants with contrasting traits were cross-fertilised, all of the offspring were heterozygous for the contrasting trait, meaning that their genotype reflected that they had different alleles for the gene being examined.

Punnett Squares and Probability

Probabilities are mathematical measures of likelihood. The empirical probability of an event is calculated by dividing the number of times the event occurs by the total number of opportunities for the event to occur. It is also possible to calculate theoretical probabilities by dividing the number of times that an event is expected to occur by the number of times that it could occur. Empirical probabilities come from observations, like those of Mendel. Theoretical probabilities, on the other hand, come from knowing how the events are produced and assuming that the probabilities of individual outcomes are equal. A probability of one for some event indicates that it is guaranteed to occur, whereas a probability of zero indicates that it is guaranteed not to occur. An example of a genetic event is a round seed produced by a pea plant.

In one experiment, Mendel demonstrated that the probability of the event “round seed” occurring was one in the F₁ offspring of true-breeding parents, one of which has round seeds and one of which has wrinkled seeds. When the F₁ plants were subsequently self-crossed, the probability of any given F₂ offspring having round seeds was now three out of four. In other words, in a large population of F₂ offspring chosen at random, 75 percent were expected to have round seeds, whereas 25 percent were expected to have wrinkled seeds. Using large numbers of crosses, Mendel was able to calculate probabilities and use these to predict the outcomes of other crosses.

When fertilisation occurs between two true-breeding parents that differ in only one characteristic, the process is called a monohybrid cross, and the resulting offspring are monohybrids. Mendel performed seven monohybrid crosses involving contrasting traits for each characteristic. On the basis of his results in F₁ and F₂ generations, Mendel postulated that each parent in the monohybrid cross contributed one of two paired unit factors to each offspring, and every possible combination of unit factors was equally likely.

To demonstrate a monohybrid cross, consider the case of true-breeding pea plants with yellow versus green pea seeds. The dominant seed colour is yellow; therefore, the parental genotypes were YY for the plants with yellow seeds and yy for the plants with green seeds, respectively. A Punnett square, devised by the British geneticist Reginald Punnett, can be drawn that applies the rules of probability to predict the possible outcomes of a genetic cross or mating and their expected frequencies. To prepare a Punnett square, all possible combinations of the parental alleles are listed along the top (for one parent) and side (for the other parent) of a grid, representing their meiotic segregation into haploid gametes. Then the combinations of egg and sperm are made in the boxes in the table to show which alleles are combining. Each box then represents the diploid genotype of a zygote, or fertilised egg, that could result from this mating. Because each possibility is equally likely, genotypic ratios can be determined from a Punnett square. If the pattern of inheritance (dominant or recessive) is known, the phenotypic ratios can be inferred as well. For a monohybrid cross of two true-breeding parents, each parent contributes one type of allele. In this case, only one genotype is possible. All offspring are Yy and have yellow seeds (Figure 5.4).

 

A self-cross of one of the Yy heterozygous offspring can be represented in a 2 × 2 Punnett square because each parent can donate one of two different alleles. Therefore, the offspring can potentially have one of four allele combinations: YY, Yy, yY, or yy (Figure 5.4). Notice that there are two ways to obtain the Yy genotype: a Y from the egg and a y from the sperm, or a y from the egg and a Y from the sperm. Both of these possibilities must be counted. Recall that Mendel’s pea-plant characteristics behaved in the same way in reciprocal crosses. Therefore, the two possible heterozygous combinations produce offspring that are genotypically and phenotypically identical despite their dominant and recessive alleles deriving from different parents. They are grouped together. Because fertilisation is a random event, we expect each combination to be equally likely and for the offspring to exhibit a ratio of YY:Yy:yy genotypes of 1:2:1 (Figure 5.4). Furthermore, because the YY and Yy offspring have yellow seeds and are phenotypically identical, applying the sum rule of probability, we expect the offspring to exhibit a phenotypic ratio of 3 yellow:1 green. Indeed, working with large sample sizes, Mendel observed approximately this ratio in every F₂ generation resulting from crosses for individual traits.

Mendel validated these results by performing an F3 cross in which he self-crossed the dominant- and recessive-expressing F₂ plants. When he self-crossed the plants expressing green seeds, all of the offspring had green seeds, confirming that all green seeds had homozygous genotypes of yy. When he self-crossed the F₂ plants expressing yellow seeds, he found that one-third of the plants bred true, and two-thirds of the plants segregated at a 3:1 ratio of yellow:green seeds. In this case, the true-breeding plants had homozygous (YY) genotypes, whereas the segregating plants corresponded to the heterozygous (Yy) genotype. When these plants self-fertilised, the outcome was just like the F₁ self-fertilising cross. 

The Test Cross Distinguishes the Dominant Phenotype

Beyond predicting the offspring of a cross between known homozygous or heterozygous parents, Mendel also developed a way to determine whether an organism that expressed a dominant trait was a heterozygote or a homozygote. Called the test cross, this technique is still used by plant and animal breeders. In a test cross, the dominant-expressing organism is crossed with an organism that is homozygous recessive for the same characteristic. If the dominant-expressing organism is a homozygote, then all F₁ offspring will be heterozygotes expressing the dominant trait (Figure 5.5). Alternatively, if the dominant expressing organism is a heterozygote, the F₁ offspring will exhibit a 1:1 ratio of heterozygotes and recessive homozygotes (Figure 5.5). The test cross further validates Mendel’s postulate that pairs of unit factors segregate equally.

 

In pea plants, round peas (R) are dominant to wrinkled peas (r). You do a test cross between a pea plant with wrinkled peas (genotype rr) and a plant of unknown genotype that has round peas. You end up with three plants, all which have round peas.  

Genetic Dominance

Our discussion of homozygous and heterozygous organisms brings us to why the F₁ heterozygous offspring were identical to one of the parents, rather than expressing both alleles. In all seven pea-plant characteristics, one of the two contrasting alleles was dominant, and the other was recessive. Mendel called the dominant allele the expressed unit factor; the recessive allele was referred to as the latent unit factor. We now know that these so-called unit factors are actually genes on homologous chromosome pairs. For a gene that is expressed in a dominant and recessive pattern, homozygous dominant and heterozygous organisms will look identical (that is, they will have different genotypes but the same phenotype). The traits of the recessive allele will only be observed in homozygous recessive individuals (Table 1).

Dominant Traits	Recessive Traits
Achondroplasia	Albinism
Brachydactyly	Cystic fibrosis
Huntington’s disease	Duchenne muscular dystrophy
Marfan syndrome	Galactosemia
Neurofibromatosis	Phenylketonuria
Widow’s peak	Sickle-cell anemia
Wooly hair	Tay-Sachs disease

Table 1. Human Inheritance in Dominant and Recessive Patterns. Source: OpenStax, Concepts of Biology, under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.

Several conventions exist for referring to genes and alleles. For the purposes of this chapter, we will abbreviate genes using the first letter of the gene’s corresponding dominant trait. For example, violet is the dominant trait for a pea plant’s flower colour, so the flower-colour gene would be abbreviated as V (note that it is customary to italicise gene designations). Furthermore, we will use uppercase and lowercase letters to represent dominant and recessive alleles, respectively. Therefore, we would refer to the genotype of a homozygous dominant pea plant with violet flowers as VV, a homozygous recessive pea plant with white flowers as vv, and a heterozygous pea plant with violet flowers as Vv.

Mendel’s experiments with pea plants suggested that: (1) two “units” or alleles exist for every gene; (2) alleles maintain their integrity in each generation (no blending); and (3) in the presence of the dominant allele, the recessive allele is hidden and makes no contribution to the phenotype. Therefore, recessive alleles can be “carried” and not expressed by individuals. Such heterozygous individuals are sometimes referred to as “carriers.” Further genetic studies in other plants and animals have shown that much more complexity exists, but that the fundamental principles of Mendelian genetics still hold true. In the sections to follow, we consider some of the extensions of Mendelism. If Mendel had chosen an experimental system that exhibited these genetic complexities, it’s possible that he would not have understood what his results meant.

Incomplete Dominance

Mendel’s results, that traits are inherited as dominant and recessive pairs, contradicted the view at that time that offspring exhibited a blend of their parents’ traits. However, the heterozygote phenotype occasionally does appear to be intermediate between the two parents. For example, in the snapdragon, Antirrhinum majus (Figure 5.6), a cross between a homozygous parent with white flowers (CWCW) and a homozygous parent with red flowers (CRCR) will produce offspring with pink flowers (CRCW). (Note that different genotypic abbreviations are used for Mendelian extensions to distinguish these patterns from simple dominance and recessiveness.) This pattern of inheritance is described as incomplete dominance, denoting the expression of two contrasting alleles such that the individual displays an intermediate phenotype. The allele for red flowers is incompletely dominant over the allele for white flowers. However, the results of a heterozygote self-cross can still be predicted, just as with Mendelian dominant and recessive crosses. In this case, the genotypic ratio would be 1 CRCR:2 CRCW:1 CWCW, and the phenotypic ratio would be 1:2:1 for red:pink:white.

 

Codominance 

A variation on incomplete dominance is codominance, in which both alleles for the same characteristic are simultaneously expressed in the heterozygote. An example of codominance is the MN blood groups of humans. The M and N alleles are expressed in the form of an M or N antigen present on the surface of red blood cells. Homozygotes (LMLM and LNLN) express either the M or the N allele, and heterozygotes (LMLN) express both alleles equally. In a self-cross between heterozygotes expressing a codominant trait, the three possible offspring genotypes are phenotypically distinct. However, the 1:2:1 genotypic ratio characteristic of a Mendelian monohybrid cross still applies.

Mendel’s Laws

Mendel’s law of dominance states that in a heterozygote, one trait will conceal the presence of another trait for the same characteristic. Rather than both alleles contributing to a phenotype, the dominant allele will be expressed exclusively. The recessive allele will remain “latent” but will be transmitted to offspring by the same manner in which the dominant allele is transmitted. The recessive trait will only be expressed by offspring that have two copies of this allele (Figure 5.4), and these offspring will breed true when self-crossed.

Since Mendel’s experiments with pea plants, researchers have found that the law of dominance does not always hold true. Instead, several different patterns of inheritance have been found to exist.

 

Observing that true-breeding pea plants with contrasting traits gave rise to F₁ generations that all expressed the dominant trait and F₂ generations that expressed the dominant and recessive traits in a 3:1 ratio, Mendel proposed the law of segregation. This law states that paired unit factors (genes) must segregate equally into gametes such that offspring have an equal likelihood of inheriting either factor. For the F₂ generation of a monohybrid cross, the following three possible combinations of genotypes could result: homozygous dominant, heterozygous, or homozygous recessive. Because heterozygotes could arise from two different pathways (receiving one dominant and one recessive allele from either parent), and because heterozygotes and homozygous dominant individuals are phenotypically identical, the law supports Mendel’s observed 3:1 phenotypic ratio. The equal segregation of alleles is the reason we can apply the Punnett square to accurately predict the offspring of parents with known genotypes. The physical basis of Mendel’s law of segregation is the first division of meiosis, in which the homologous chromosomes with their different versions of each gene are segregated into daughter nuclei. The role of the meiotic segregation of chromosomes in sexual reproduction was not understood by the scientific community during Mendel’s lifetime.

Mendel’s law of independent assortment states that genes do not influence each other with regard to the sorting of alleles into gametes, and every possible combination of alleles for every gene is equally likely to occur. The independent assortment of genes can be illustrated by the dihybrid cross, a cross between two true-breeding parents that express different traits for two characteristics. Consider the characteristics of seed colour and seed texture for two pea plants, one that has green, wrinkled seeds (yyrr) and another that has yellow, round seeds (YYRR). Because each parent is homozygous, the law of segregation indicates that the gametes for the green/wrinkled plant all are yr, and the gametes for the yellow/round plant are all YR. Therefore, the F₁ generation of offspring all are YyRr (Figure 5.8).

 

In pea plants, round seed shape (R) is dominant to wrinkled seed shape (r) and yellow peas (Y) are dominant to green peas (y). What are the possible genotypes and phenotypes for a cross between RrYY and rrYy pea plants? How many squares do you need to do a Punnett square analysis of this cross?

For the F₂ generation, the law of segregation requires that each gamete receive either an R allele or an r allele along with either a Y allele or a y allele. The law of independent assortment states that a gamete into which an r allele sorted would be equally likely to contain either a Y allele or a y allele. Thus, there are four equally likely gametes that can be formed when the YyRr heterozygote is self-crossed, as follows: YR, Yr, yR, and yr. Arranging these gametes along the top and left of a 4 × 4 Punnett square (Figure xx) gives us 16 equally likely genotypic combinations. From these genotypes, we infer a phenotypic ratio of 9 round/yellow:3 round/green:3 wrinkled/yellow:1 wrinkled/green (Figure 5.8). These are the offspring ratios we would expect, assuming we performed the crosses with a large enough sample size.

Because of independent assortment and dominance, the 9:3:3:1 dihybrid phenotypic ratio can be collapsed into two 3:1 ratios, characteristic of any monohybrid cross that follows a dominant and recessive pattern. Ignoring seed colour and considering only seed texture in the above dihybrid cross, we would expect that three quarters of the F₂ generation offspring would be round, and one quarter would be wrinkled. Similarly, isolating only seed colour, we would assume that three quarters of the F₂ offspring would be yellow and one quarter would be green. The sorting of alleles for texture and colour are independent events, so we can apply the product rule. Therefore, the proportion of round and yellow F₂ offspring is expected to be (3/4) × (3/4) = 9/16, and the proportion of wrinkled and green offspring is expected to be (1/4) × (1/4) = 1/16. These proportions are identical to those obtained using a Punnett square. Round, green and wrinkled, yellow offspring can also be calculated using the product rule, as each of these genotypes includes one dominant and one recessive phenotype. Therefore, the proportion of each is calculated as (3/4) × (1/4) = 3/16.

The law of independent assortment also indicates that a cross between yellow, wrinkled (YYrr) and green, round (yyRR) parents would yield the same F₁ and F₂ offspring as in the YYRR x yyrr cross.

The physical basis for the law of independent assortment also lies in meiosis I, in which the different homologous pairs line up in random orientations. Each gamete can contain any combination of paternal and maternal chromosomes (and therefore the genes on them) because the orientation of tetrads on the metaphase plane is random.

Chromosomal Basis of Inherited Disorders

Inherited disorders can arise when chromosomes behave abnormally during meiosis. We can divide chromosome disorders into two categories: abnormalities in chromosome number and chromosomal structural rearrangements. Because even small chromosome segments can span many genes, chromosomal disorders are characteristically dramatic and often fatal.

Chromosome Identification

Chromosome isolation and microscopic observation forms the basis of cytogenetics and is the primary method by which clinicians detect chromosomal abnormalities in humans. A karyotype is the number and appearance of chromosomes, and includes their length, banding pattern, and centromere position. To obtain a view of an individual’s karyotype, cytologists photograph the chromosomes and then cut and paste each chromosome into a chart, or karyogram. Another name is an ideogram (Figure 5.9).

 

In a given species, we can identify chromosomes by their number, size, centromere position, and banding pattern. In a human karyotype, autosomes or “body chromosomes” (all of the non–sex chromosomes) are generally organised in approximate order of size from largest (chromosome 1) to smallest (chromosome 22). The X and Y chromosomes are not autosomes. However, chromosome 21 is actually shorter than chromosome 22. Researchers discovered this after naming Down syndrome as trisomy 21, reflecting how this disorder results from possessing one extra chromosome 21 (three total). Not wanting to change the name of this important disorder, scientists retained the numbering of chromosome 21 despite describing it having the shortest set of chromosomes. We may designate the chromosome “arms” projecting from either end of the centromere as short or long, depending on their relative lengths. We abbreviate the short arm p (for “petite”); whereas, we abbreviate the long arm q (because it follows “p” alphabetically). Numbers further subdivide and denote each arm. Using this naming system, we can describe chromosome locations consistently in the scientific literature. 

Chromosome Number Disorders

Of all of the chromosomal disorders, chromosome number abnormalities are the most obviously identifiable from a karyogram. Chromosome number disorders include duplicating or losing entire chromosomes, as well as changes in the number of complete sets of chromosomes. They are caused by nondisjunction, which occurs when homologous chromosome pairs or sister chromatids fail to separate during meiosis. Misaligned or incomplete synapsis, or a spindle apparatus dysfunction that facilitates chromosome migration, can cause nondisjunction. The risk of nondisjunction occurring increases with the parents' age.

Nondisjunction can occur during either meiosis I or II, with differing results (Figure 5.10). If homologous chromosomes fail to separate during meiosis I, the result is two gametes that lack that particular chromosome and two gametes with two chromosome copies. If sister chromatids fail to separate during meiosis II, the result is one gamete that lacks that chromosome, two normal gametes with one chromosome copy, and one gamete with two chromosome copies.

 

Aneuploidy

Scientists call an individual with the appropriate number of chromosomes for their species euploid. In humans, euploidy corresponds to 22 pairs of autosomes and one pair of sex chromosomes. An individual with an error in chromosome number is described as aneuploid, a term that includes monosomy (losing one chromosome) or trisomy (gaining an extraneous chromosome). Monosomic human zygotes missing any one copy of an autosome invariably fail to develop to birth because they lack essential genes. This underscores the importance of “gene dosage” in humans. Most autosomal trisomies also fail to develop to birth; however, duplications of some smaller chromosomes (13, 15, 18, 21, or 22) can result in offspring that survive for several weeks to many years. Trisomic individuals suffer from a different type of genetic imbalance: an excess in gene dose. Individuals with an extra chromosome may synthesise an abundance of the gene products, which that chromosome encodes. This extra dose (150 percent) of specific genes can lead to a number of functional challenges and often precludes development. The most common trisomy among viable births is that of chromosome 21, which corresponds to Down Syndrome. Short stature and stunted digits, facial distinctions that include a broad skull and large tongue, and significant developmental delays characterise individuals with this inherited disorder.

 

Polyploidy

We call an individual with more than the correct number of chromosome sets (two for diploid species) polyploid. For instance, fertilising an abnormal diploid egg with a normal haploid sperm would yield a triploid zygote. Polyploid animals are extremely rare, with only a few examples among the flatworms, crustaceans, amphibians, fish, and lizards. Polyploid animals are sterile because meiosis cannot proceed normally and instead produces mostly aneuploid daughter cells that cannot yield viable zygotes. Rarely, polyploid animals can reproduce asexually by haplodiploidy, in which an unfertilised egg divides mitotically to produce offspring. In contrast, polyploidy is very common in the plant kingdom, and polyploid plants tend to be larger and more robust than euploids of their species (Figure 5.12).

 

Sex Chromosome Nondisjunction in Humans

Humans display dramatic deleterious effects with autosomal trisomies and monosomies. Therefore, it may seem counterintuitive that human females and males can function normally, despite carrying different numbers of the X chromosome. Rather than a gain or loss of autosomes, variations in the number of sex chromosomes occur with relatively mild effects. In part, this happens because of the molecular process X inactivation. Early in development, when female mammalian embryos consist of just a few thousand cells (relative to trillions in the newborn), one X chromosome in each cell inactivates by tightly condensing into a quiescent (dormant) structure, or a Barr body.

The chance that an X chromosome (maternally or paternally derived) inactivates in each cell is random, but once this occurs, all cells derived from that one will have the same inactive X chromosome or Barr body. By this process, females compensate for their double genetic dose of X chromosome. In so-called “tortoiseshell” cats, we observe embryonic X inactivation as colour variegation (Figure 5.13). Females that are heterozygous for an X-linked coat colour gene will express one of two different coat colours over different regions of their body, corresponding to whichever X chromosome inactivates in that region's embryonic cell progenitor.

 

An individual carrying an abnormal number of X chromosomes will inactivate all but one X chromosome in each of her cells. However, even inactivated X chromosomes continue to express a few genes, and X chromosomes must reactivate for the proper maturation of female ovaries. As a result, X-chromosomal abnormalities typically occur with mild intellectual and physical disorders or disabilities, as well as sterility. If the X chromosome is absent altogether, the individual will not develop in utero.

Scientists have identified and characterised several errors in sex chromosome number. Individuals with three X chromosomes, triplo-X, are phenotypically female but express developmental delays and reduced fertility. The XXY genotype, corresponding to one type of Klinefelter syndrome, corresponds to phenotypically male individuals with small testes, enlarged breasts, and reduced body hair. More complex types of Klinefelter syndrome exist in which the individual has as many as five X chromosomes. In all types, every X chromosome except one undergoes inactivation to compensate for the excess genetic dosage. We see this as several Barr bodies in each cell nucleus. Turner syndrome, characterised as an X0 genotype (i.e., only a single sex chromosome), corresponds to a phenotypically female individual with short stature, webbed skin in the neck region, hearing and cardiac impairments, and sterility.

Duplications and Deletions

In addition to losing or gaining an entire chromosome, a chromosomal segment may duplicate or lose itself. Duplications and deletions often produce offspring that survive but exhibit abnormalities. Duplicated chromosomal segments may fuse to existing chromosomes or may be free in the nucleus. Cri-du-chat (from the French for “cry of the cat”) is a syndrome that occurs with nervous system abnormalities and identifiable physical features that result from a deletion of most 5p (the small arm of chromosome 5) (Figure 5.14). Infants with this genotype emit a characteristic high-pitched cry on which the disorder’s name is based.

 

Chromosomal Structural Rearrangements

Cytologists have characterised numerous structural rearrangements in chromosomes, but chromosome inversions and translocations are the most common. We can identify both during meiosis by the adaptive pairing of rearranged chromosomes with their former homologs to maintain appropriate gene alignment. If the genes on two homologs are not oriented correctly, a recombination event could result in losing genes from one chromosome and gaining genes on the other. This would produce aneuploid gametes.

Chromosome Inversions

A chromosome inversion  is the detachment, 180° rotation, and reinsertion of part of a chromosome. Inversions may occur in nature as a result of mechanical shear, or from transposable elements' action (special DNA sequences capable of facilitating rearranging chromosome segments with the help of enzymes that cut and paste DNA sequences). Unless they disrupt a gene sequence, inversions only change gene orientation and are likely to have more mild effects than aneuploid errors. However, altered gene orientation can result in functional changes because regulators of gene expression could move out of position with respect to their targets, causing aberrant levels of gene products.

An inversion can be pericentric and include the centromere, or paracentric and occur outside the centromere (Figure 5.15). A pericentric inversion that is asymmetric about the centromere can change the chromosome arms' relative lengths, making these inversions easily identifiable.

 

When one homologous chromosome undergoes an inversion but the other does not, the individual is an inversion heterozygote. To maintain point-for-point synapsis during meiosis, one homolog must form a loop, and the other homolog must mold around it. Although this topology can ensure that the genes correctly align, it also forces the homologs to stretch and can occur with imprecise synapsis regions (Figure 5.16).

 

Evolution Connection: The Chromosome 18 Inversion

Not all chromosomes' structural rearrangements produce nonviable, impaired, or infertile individuals. In rare instances, such a change can result in new species evolving. In fact, a pericentric inversion in chromosome 18 appears to have contributed to human evolution. This inversion is not present in our closest genetic relatives, the chimpanzees. Humans and chimpanzees differ cytogenetically by pericentric inversions on several chromosomes and by the fusion of two separate chromosomes in chimpanzees that correspond to chromosome two in humans.

Scientists believe the pericentric chromosome 18 inversion occurred in early humans following their divergence from a common ancestor with chimpanzees approximately five million years ago. Researchers characterising this inversion have suggested that approximately 19,000 nucleotide bases were duplicated on 18p, and the duplicated region inverted and reinserted on chromosome 18 of an ancestral human.

A comparison of human and chimpanzee genes in the region of this inversion indicates that two genes—ROCK1 and USP14—that are adjacent on chimpanzee chromosome 17 (which corresponds to human chromosome 18) are more distantly positioned on human chromosome 18. This suggests that one of the inversion breakpoints occurred between these two genes. Interestingly, humans and chimpanzees express USP14 at distinct levels in specific cell types, including cortical cells and fibroblasts. Perhaps the chromosome 18 inversion in an ancestral human repositioned specific genes and reset their expression levels in a useful way. Because both ROCK1 and USP14 encode cellular enzymes, a change in their expression could alter cellular function. We do not know how this inversion contributed to hominid evolution, but it appears to be a significant factor in the divergence of humans from other primates (Goidts, et al, 2004).

Translocations

A translocation occurs when a chromosome segment dissociates and reattaches to a different, nonhomologous chromosome. Translocations can be benign or have devastating effects depending on how the positions of genes are altered with respect to regulatory sequences. Notably, specific translocations have occurred with several cancers and with schizophrenia. Reciprocal translocations result from exchanging chromosome segments between two nonhomologous chromosomes such that there is no genetic information gain or loss (Figure 5.17).

 

Applications in the Real World

Geneticists Use Karyograms to Identify Chromosomal Aberrations

Although we refer to Mendel as the “father of modern genetics,” he performed his experiments with none of the tools that the geneticists of today routinely employ. One such powerful cytological technique is karyotyping, a method in which geneticists can identify traits characterised by chromosomal abnormalities from a single cell. To observe an individual’s karyotype, a geneticist first collects a person’s cells (like white blood cells) from a blood sample or other tissue. In the laboratory, the geneticist stimulates the isolated cells to begin actively dividing. The geneticist then applies the chemical colchicine to cells to arrest condensed chromosomes in metaphase. The geneticist then induces swelling in the cells using a hypotonic solution so the chromosomes spread apart. Finally, the geneticist preserves the sample in a fixative and applies it to a slide.

The geneticist then stains chromosomes with one of several dyes to better visualise each chromosome pair's distinct and reproducible banding patterns. Following staining, the geneticist views the chromosomes using bright-field microscopy. A common stain choice is the Giemsa stain. Giemsa staining results in approximately 400–800 bands (of tightly coiled DNA and condensed proteins) arranged along all 23 chromosome pairs. An experienced geneticist can identify each band. In addition to the banding patterns, geneticists further identify chromosomes on the basis of size and centromere location. To obtain the classic depiction of the karyotype in which homologous chromosome pairs align in numerical order from longest to shortest, the geneticist obtains a digital image, identifies each chromosome, and manually arranges the chromosomes into this pattern (Figure 5.9).

At its most basic, the karyogram may reveal genetic abnormalities in which an individual has too many or too few chromosomes per cell. Examples of this are Down Syndrome, which one identifies by a third copy of chromosome 21, and Turner Syndrome, which is characterised by the presence of only one X chromosome in females instead of the normal two. Geneticists can also identify large DNA deletions or insertions. For instance, geneticists can identify Jacobsen Syndrome—which involves distinctive facial features as well as heart and bleeding defects—by a deletion on chromosome 11. Finally, the karyotype can pinpoint translocations, which occur when a segment of genetic material breaks from one chromosome and reattaches to another chromosome or to a different part of the same chromosome. Translocations are implicated in certain cancers, including chronic myelogenous leukemia.

During Mendel’s lifetime, inheritance was an abstract concept that one could only infer by performing crosses and observing the traits that offspring expressed. By observing a karyogram, today’s geneticists can actually visualise an individual's chromosomal composition to confirm or predict genetic abnormalities in offspring, even before birth.

References

Goidts, V.; Szamalek, J.M.;  Hameister, H.;  Kehrer-Sawatzki, H. (2004). Segmental duplication associated with the human-specific inversion of chromosome 18: a further example of the impact of segmental duplications on karyotype and genome evolution in primates, Human Genetics. 115 (2004):116-122. DOI: 10.1007/s00439-004-1120-z

Mendel J.G. (1866). “Versuche über Pflanzenhybriden.” Verhandlungen des naturforschenden Vereines in Brünn, Bd. IV für das Jahr, 1865 Abhandlungen (1866):3–47. [for English translation, see http://www.mendelweb.org/Mendel.plain.html]