Standard Genetic Nomenglature of the Pig, with Glossaries Zhiliang Hu Iowa State University, [email protected]

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

Animal Science Publications Animal Science 2011 Standard Genetic Nomenglature of the Pig, with Glossaries Zhiliang Hu Iowa State University, [email protected] Carissa A. Park Iowa State University, [email protected] James M. Reecy Iowa State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ans_pubs Part of the Agriculture Commons, Animal Sciences Commons, and the Genetics Commons The ompc lete bibliographic information for this item can be found at http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ ans_pubs/172. For information on how to cite this item, please visit http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ howtocite.html. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Animal Science at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Animal Science Publications by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Standard Genetic Nomenglature of the Pig, with Glossaries Abstract Genetics includes the study of genotypes, phenotypes and the mechanisms of genetic control between them. Genetic terms describe the processes, genes and traits with which genetic phenomena are described and examined. The eg netic process terminologies are thoroughly discussed in the previous chapters. Therefore, in this chapter, we will only list the terms for genetic processes and concepts in Appendix I (a general genetic glossary), and concentrate the discussion on pig gene and trait terminologies (Appendix 10; a glossary for pig diseases and defects is also included (Appendix III). Disciplines Agriculture | Animal Sciences | Genetics Comments This chapter is from The Genetics of the Pig, 2nd ed., chapter 19 (2011): 473. Posted with permission. This article is available at Iowa State University Digital Repository: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ans_pubs/172 Zhi-Liang Hu, Carissa A. Park and James M. Reecy Iowa State University, USA Introduction 473 Locus and Gene Names and Symbols 474 Locus name and symbol 474 Allele name and symbol 475 Genotype terminology 475 Trait and Phenotype Terminology 475 Pig traits and trait ontology 475 Trait nomenclature recommendations 479 Phenotype nomenclature recommendations 480 Future Prospects 480 Acknowledgements 480 References 481 Appendix I Genetic Glossary 482 Appendix II Pig Trait Glossary 487 Appendix III Pig Disease and Defect Glossary 492 Introduction production and genetic improvement indus­ tries. This issue becomes even more evident in Genetics includes the study of genotypes, phe­ the post-genomics era, owing to the rapid notypes and the mechanisms of genetic con­ accumulation of large quantities of genetic and trol between them. Genetic terms describe the phenotypic data, and the use of computer processes, genes and traits with which genetic software to manage such data. This imposes a phenomena are described and examined. The challenge for the precise definition and inter­ genetic process terminologies are thoroughly pretation of gene and trait terms. discussed in the previous chapters. Therefore, For example, Myostatin (gene MSTN) is in this chapter, we will only list the terms for also known as Growth and Differentiation genetic processes and concepts in Appendix I Factor 8 (gene GDF8) (one can also find inap­ (a general genetic glossary), and concentrate propriate abbreviations such as GDF-8 in the the discussion on pig gene and trait terminolo­ literature) and is referred to as the 'muscle gies (Appendix 10; a glossary for pig diseases hypertrophy" locus in cattle. While all these and defects is also included (Appendix III). names are interchangeably used in the litera­ A standardized genetic nomenclature is ture, it gets more complicated when one con­ vital . for unambiguous concept description, siders paralogous gene duplications across efficient genetic data management and effec­ species, which led Rodgers et a/. (2007) to tive communications among not only scien­ propose MSTN-1 and MSTN-2 as names. tists, but also those who are involved in the pig Unfortunately, this naming scheme does not ©CAB International 2011. The Genetics of the Pig, 2nd Edn (eds M.F. Rothschild and A. Ruvinsky) 473 follow Human Gene Nomenclature Committee synonymous with a gene, refers to a position in (HGNC) guidelines, which would indicate that the genome that can be identified by a marker. they should be named MSTNl and MSTN2. A 'chromosome region' is defined as a genomic In terms of traits, an example that would region that has been associated with a particu­ benefit from consistent nomenclature is the lar syndrome or phenotype. longissimus dorsi muscle area, which is also Gene names and symbols will follow the referred to as the loin eye area (LEA), loin mus­ human gene when 1:1 orthology is known. Gene cle area (LMA), meat area (MLD), ribeye area names should be short and specific and convey (REA), etc. Each of these is known by different the character or function of the gene. Gene individuals as the default name for the trait. names will be written using American spelling Complexity is further increased by variation in and contain only Latin letters or a combination of anatomical locations, physiological stages and Latin letters and Arabic numerals. The first letter methods used to measure a given trait. This may of a gene symbol should be the same as for the seem manageable at first, but once one starts to gene name. The symbol will consist of upper­ compare data across different labs, publications case Latin letters and possibly Arabic numerals. or species, it quickly becomes very confusing. Gene symbols must be unique. While we may not want to dictate to the The locus name should be in capitalized community how genetic terms are defined, Latin letters or a combination of Latin letters there are good reasons why all researchers and Arabic numerals. If the locus name is two need to adopt standardized genetic nomencla­ or more words, each word after the first word tures. The emergence of the use of ontologies should be in capital Latin characters. The locus in biological research has contributed a new symbol should consist of as few Latin letters as way to effectively use, standardize and manage possible or a combination of Latin letters and genetics terms. The Gene Ontology (GO) con­ Arabic numerals. The characters of a symbol sortium has provided a good example (The should always be capital Latin characters, and Gene Ontology Consortium, 2000). When should begin with the initial letter of the name genomics information must be transferred of the locus. If the locus name is two or more across species to perpetuate genetic discover­ words, then the initial letters should be used in ies, the role of a standardized genetic nomen­ the locus symbol. The locus name and symbol clature becomes even more important. should be printed in italics wherever possible; The goal of this chapter is to help estab­ otherwise they should be underlined. lish guidelines for nomenclature, with the hope When assigning gene nomenclature, the that it will facilitate the comparison of results gene name and symbol should be assigned between experiments and, most importantly, based on existing HGNC nomenclature where prevent confusion. possible (e.g. 1:1 for swine:human orthologues). Ensembl (a joint project between EMBL-EBI (European Molecular Biology Laboratory­ Locus and Gene Names and Symbols European Bioinformatics Institute) and the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute to develop a Locus name and symbol software system that produces and maintains automatic annotation on selected eukaryotic These guidelines for gene nomenclature are genomes) has used the new EPO (Enredo, adapted and abbreviated from the HGNC Guide­ Pecan, Ortheus) pipeline (Paten et a/., 2008) lines (http://www.genenames.org/guidelines. for whole genome alignment of the swine html). genome. Initial efforts to provide information A 'gene' is a functional hereditary unit about genes predicted during the swine genome that occupies a fixed location on a chromo­ sequencing effort assigned standardized nomen­ some, has a specific influence on phenotype, clature based on human gene nomenclature for and is capable of mutation to various allelic 2798 swine genes (http://www.ensembl.org/ forms. In the absence of demonstrated function Sus_scrofa/lnfo/StatsTable). a gene may be characterized by sequence, tran­ There are two categories of novel swine scription or homology. A 'locus', which is not genes: (i) novel genes predicted by bioinformatic gene prediction programs; and (ii) novel swine SNP occurs outside an identified gene, the genes that were studied before the completion SNP locus can be designated using the dbSNP _ of the swine genome. In cases where no strict id as the locus symbol, and the nucleotide allelic 1:1 human orthologue exists that has been variants are then superscripted as alleles (e.g. assigned nomenclature, the LOC# or Ensembl rs123456T). ID should be used as a temporary gene symbol. The allele symbol should always be written In order to assign a name to a novel gene, it will with the locus symbol. Specifically, the allele need to be manually curated and assigned a symbol is written as a superscript following the unique name, following HGNC guidelines. locus symbol. For example, an SNP allele can be designated based on its dbSNP_id, followed by a hyphen and the specific nucleotide, as in Allele name and symbol MSTN•1234567 r. The allele symbol should be printed immediately adjacent to the locus sym­ These guidelines for allele nomenclature are bol, with no gaps. The allele name and symbol adapted from Young (1998) and mouse should be printed in italics whenever possible, genome nomenclature guidelines (http://www. or otherwise be underlined. informatics.jax.org/mgihome/nomen/gene. shtml), in accordance with HGNC guidelines. The allele names should be as brief as pos­ Genotype terminology sible, yet still convey the variation associated with the allele. Alleles do not have to be named, The genotype of an individual should be shown If allele is but should be given symbols.
Recommended publications
  • Guidelines for Conducting Birth Defects Surveillance

    Guidelines for Conducting Birth Defects Surveillance

    NATIONAL BIRTH DEFECTS PREVENTION NETWORK HTTP://WWW.NBDPN.ORG Guidelines for Conducting Birth Defects Surveillance Edited By Lowell E. Sever, Ph.D. June 2004 Support for development, production, and distribution of these guidelines was provided by the Birth Defects State Research Partnerships Team, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Copies of Guidelines for Conducting Birth Defects Surveillance can be viewed or downloaded from the NBDPN website at http://www.nbdpn.org/bdsurveillance.html. Comments and suggestions on this document are welcome. Submit comments to the Surveillance Guidelines and Standards Committee via e-mail at [email protected]. You may also contact a member of the NBDPN Executive Committee by accessing http://www.nbdpn.org and then selecting Network Officers and Committees. Suggested citation according to format of Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts ∗ Submitted to Biomedical Journals:∗ National Birth Defects Prevention Network (NBDPN). Guidelines for Conducting Birth Defects Surveillance. Sever, LE, ed. Atlanta, GA: National Birth Defects Prevention Network, Inc., June 2004. National Birth Defects Prevention Network, Inc. Web site: http://www.nbdpn.org E-mail: [email protected] ∗International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. Ann Intern Med 1988;108:258-265. We gratefully acknowledge the following individuals and organizations who contributed to developing, writing, editing, and producing this document. NBDPN SURVEILLANCE GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE STEERING GROUP Carol Stanton, Committee Chair (CO) Larry Edmonds (CDC) F. John Meaney (AZ) Glenn Copeland (MI) Lisa Miller-Schalick (MA) Peter Langlois (TX) Leslie O’Leary (CDC) Cara Mai (CDC) EDITOR Lowell E.
  • Malformation Syndromes: a Review of Mouse/Human Homology

    Malformation Syndromes: a Review of Mouse/Human Homology

    J Med Genet: first published as 10.1136/jmg.25.7.480 on 1 July 1988. Downloaded from Joalrn(ll of Medical Genetics 1988, 25, 480-487 Malformation syndromes: a review of mouse/human homology ROBIN M WINTER Fromii the Kennetivdy Galton Centre, Clinlicail Research Centre, Northiwick Park Hospital, Harrow, Middlesex HAI 3UJ. SUMMARY The purpose of this paper is to review the known and possible homologies between mouse and human multiple congenital anomaly syndromes. By identifying single gene defects causing similar developmental abnormalities in mouse and man, comparative gene mapping can be carried out, and if the loci in mouse and man are situated in homologous chromosome segments, further molecular studies can be performed to show that the loci are identical. This paper puts forward tentative homologies in the hope that some will be investigated and shown to be true homologies at the molecular level, thus providing mouse models for complex developmental syndromes. The mouse malformation syndromes are reviewed according to their major gene effects. X linked syndromes are reviewed separately because of the greater ease of establishing homology for these conditions. copyright. The purpose of this paper is to review the known even phenotypic similarity would be no guarantee and possible homologies between mouse and human that such genes in man and mouse are homologous". genetic malformation syndromes. Lalley and By identifying single gene defects causing similar following criteria for developmental abnormalities in mouse and man, McKusick' recommend the http://jmg.bmj.com/ identifying gene homologies between species: comparative gene mapping can be carried out, and if (1) Similar nucleotide or amino acid sequence.
  • Fetal Pathology of Neural Tube Defects – an Overview of 68 Cases Fetalpathologie Der Neuralrohrdefekte – Ein Überblick Über 68 NTD-Fälle

    Fetal Pathology of Neural Tube Defects – an Overview of 68 Cases Fetalpathologie Der Neuralrohrdefekte – Ein Überblick Über 68 NTD-Fälle

    GebFra Science | Original Article Fetal Pathology of Neural Tube Defects – An Overview of 68 Cases Fetalpathologie der Neuralrohrdefekte – ein Überblick über 68 NTD-Fälle Authors Deutsche Version unter: Katharina Schoner 1,RolandAxt-Fliedner2, Rainer Bald 3, https:/doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-103459 Barbara Fritz 4,JuergenKohlhase5, Thomas Kohl 6, Supporting Information: Helga Rehder 1, 7 https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-103459 Affiliations ABSTRACT 1 Institute of Pathology, WG Fetal Pathology, University Introduction The prevalence of neural tube defects world- of Gießen and Marburg, Philipps University of Marburg, wide is 1–2 per 1000 neonates. Neural tube defects result Marburg, Germany from a disturbance of neurulation in the 3rd or 4th week of 2 Department of Prenatal Medicine, University Hospital development and thus represent the earliest manifestation of Gießen and Marburg, Gießen, Germany of organ malformation. Neural tube defects (NTD) are classi- 3 Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Klinikum fied into cranial dysraphism leading to anencephaly or menin- Leverkusen, Leverkusen, Germany goencephalocele and spinal dysraphism with or without me- 4 Center of Human Genetics, University of Gießen and ningomyelocele. In isolated form they have multifactorial Marburg, Philipps University of Marburg, Marburg, causes, and the empirical risk of recurrence in Central Europe Germany is 2%. As associated malformations they tend to occur sporad- – 5 Praxis for Human Genetics Center of Preimplantation ically, and in monogenic syndromes they follow Mendelian in- Genetic Diagnosis, Freiburg, Germany heritance patterns with a high risk of recurrence. 6 German Center for Fetal Surgery & minimal-invasive Patients Autopsies were performed on 68 fetuses following a Therapy, University Hospital of Gießen and Marburg, prenatal diagnosis of NTD and induced abortion.
  • HSVMA Guide to Congenital and Heritable Disorders in Dogs

    HSVMA Guide to Congenital and Heritable Disorders in Dogs

    GUIDE TO CONGENITAL AND HERITABLE DISORDERS IN DOGS Includes Genetic Predisposition to Diseases Special thanks to W. Jean Dodds, D.V.M. for researching and compiling the information contained in this guide. Dr. Dodds is a world-renowned vaccine research scientist with expertise in hematology, immunology, endocrinology and nutrition. Published by The Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association P.O. Box 208, Davis, CA 95617, Phone: 530-759-8106; Fax: 530-759-8116 First printing: August 1994, revised August 1997, November 2000, January 2004, March 2006, and May 2011. Introduction: Purebred dogs of many breeds and even mixed breed dogs are prone to specific abnormalities which may be familial or genetic in nature. Often, these health problems are unapparent to the average person and can only be detected with veterinary medical screening. This booklet is intended to provide information about the potential health problems associated with various purebred dogs. Directory Section I A list of 182 more commonly known purebred dog breeds, each of which is accompanied by a number or series of numbers that correspond to the congenital and heritable diseases identified and described in Section II. Section II An alphabetical listing of congenital and genetically transmitted diseases that occur in purebred dogs. Each disease is assigned an identification number, and some diseases are followed by the names of the breeds known to be subject to those diseases. How to use this book: Refer to Section I to find the congenital and genetically transmitted diseases associated with a breed or breeds in which you are interested. Refer to Section II to find the names and definitions of those diseases.
  • 7.1 Birth Defects Code List

    7.1 BIRTH DEFECTS CODE LIST Based on the British Pediatric Association (BPA) Classification of Diseases (1979) and the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) (1979) Code modifications developed by Division of Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Public Health Service U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Atlanta, Georgia 30333 and Birth Defects Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch Epidemiology and Disease Surveillance Unit Texas Department of State Health Services 1100 West 49th Street Austin, TX 78756 Revised July 31, 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................. 2 Introduction To Birth Defect Diagnosis Coding ................................................................................................. 7 Purpose ............................................................................................................................................................ 7 BPA coding system .......................................................................................................................................... 7 Description of the BPA code ............................................................................................................................ 8 Problems with the
  • Guidelines for Conducting Birth Defects Surveillance

    NATIONAL BIRTH DEFECTS PREVENTION NETWORK HTTP://WWW.NBDPN.ORG Guidelines for Conducting Birth Defects Surveillance Edited By Lowell E. Sever, Ph.D. June 2004 Support for development, production, and distribution of these guidelines was provided by the Birth Defects State Research Partnerships Team, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Copies of Guidelines for Conducting Birth Defects Surveillance can be viewed or downloaded from the NBDPN website at http://www.nbdpn.org/bdsurveillance.html. Comments and suggestions on this document are welcome. Submit comments to the Surveillance Guidelines and Standards Committee via e-mail at [email protected]. You may also contact a member of the NBDPN Executive Committee by accessing http://www.nbdpn.org and then selecting Network Officers and Committees. Suggested citation according to format of Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts ∗ Submitted to Biomedical Journals:∗ National Birth Defects Prevention Network (NBDPN). Guidelines for Conducting Birth Defects Surveillance. Sever, LE, ed. Atlanta, GA: National Birth Defects Prevention Network, Inc., June 2004. National Birth Defects Prevention Network, Inc. Web site: http://www.nbdpn.org E-mail: [email protected] ∗International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. Ann Intern Med 1988;108:258-265. We gratefully acknowledge the following individuals and organizations who contributed to developing, writing, editing, and producing this document. NBDPN SURVEILLANCE GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE STEERING GROUP Carol Stanton, Committee Chair (CO) Larry Edmonds (CDC) F. John Meaney (AZ) Glenn Copeland (MI) Lisa Miller-Schalick (MA) Peter Langlois (TX) Leslie O’Leary (CDC) Cara Mai (CDC) EDITOR Lowell E.
  • Cephaloceles and Related Malformations

    Cephaloceles and Related Malformations

    Cephaloceles and Related Malformations Thomas P. Naidich, 1 Nolan R. Altman, Bruce H. Braffman, David G. MeLone, and Robert A. Zimmerman From Baptist Hospital of Miami, Miami, FL (TPN); Miami Children's Hospital, Miami, FL (NRA); Radiology Associates of Hollywood, Hollywood, FL (BHB); Children's Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL (DGM); and Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA (RAZ) This chapter addresses the gross pathology 1. Cranial meningoceles are cephaloceles in and imaging of anencephaly, exencephaly and which the structures protruding consist cephaloceles, and includes the clinical, epidemi­ solely of leptomeninges and cerebrospinal ologic, and pathologic features that have helped fluid (CSF). the authors to understand these conditions and 2. Cranial glioceles are cephaloceles in which to contribute meaningfully to their diagnosis and the structures protruding consist only of a management. This paper specifically excludes the glial-lined cyst containing CSF (22). fronto-ethmoidal (sincipital) cephaloceles, the re­ 3. Cranial meningoencephaloceles are cephal­ lated nasal gliomas and nasal dermal sinuses, and oceles in which the structures protruding the median cleft face syndrome, because these consist of leptomeninges, CSF, and brain. subjects have already been reviewed, in detail, in Some authors also distinguish cranial men­ the American College of Radiology Self-Evalua­ ingoencephaloventriculocele in which por­ tion Program No. 28, Neuroradiology Text and tions of the ventricles protrude into the Syllabus (1), in texts (2-6), and in articles (7-22). hernia sac, perhaps in association with her­ niating choroid plexus. Definitions 4. Atretic cephaloceles are formes fruste of cephaloceles that are characterized by a Cranium bifidum occultum designates simple small, noncystic, flat, or nodular lesion sit­ midline or paired paramedian skull defect(s) with­ uated in the midline of the scalp, either near out prolapse of meninges or brain (23).
  • Spina Bifida

    Spina Bifida

    International Journal of Anatomy and Research, Int J Anat Res 2019, Vol 7(2.1):6390-96. ISSN 2321-4287 Original Research Article DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.16965/ijar.2019.124 SPINA BIFIDA - A RETROSPECTIVE STUDY Amandeep Kaur 1, Mahesh Sharma2 1 Demonstrator, Department of Anatomy, Government Medical College & Hospital, Anatomy De- partment, E- block, Sector 32-, Chandigarh, India. *2 Professor & Head of the Department, MBBS, MS Human Anatomy, Government Medical College & Hospital, Anatomy Department, E- block, Sector 32-, Chandigarh, India. ABSTRACT Background: The occurrence of congenital anomalies is increasing in the present era. The incidence is estimated to be 3-7% of the congenital disorders. Aim: The present study is focused on the spina bifida and to know the incidence of spinal defects in north Indian population. This study will be helpful for providing baseline data from the north Indian population. Methodology: The present study was done on 1400 fetuses which were sent by gynecology and obstetrics department of GMCH Sec. 32, Chandigarh to anatomy department for autopsy purpose during period of 2008 to 2017. In every case, location and morphology of spinal defects were observed. Results: The present study showed 11.7% cases with spinal defects, out of these, 1.2% spina bifida closed (occulta) and 10.5% spina bifida open defects were noted which included 1.2% ventral spinal defects, 31.7% with meningocele, 24.3% myelomeningocele, 28.6% myelocele and 12.8% with rachischisis. Conclusions: It is important to note the detection of congenital anomalies in early stage of gestation. It is advantageous for the obstetrician in planning the line of management whether to continue the pregnancy or not.
  • NEURAL TUBE DISORDERS Dev3 (1)

    NEURAL TUBE DISORDERS Dev3 (1) Neural Tube Disorders (s. Dysraphism) Last updated: January 16, 2021 Classification .................................................................................................................................... 1 ETIOPATHOPHYSIOLOGY ......................................................................................................................... 1 Theories ............................................................................................................................................ 1 Etiology ............................................................................................................................................ 1 EPIDEMIOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................ 1 CLASSIFICATION, PATHOLOGY, CLINICAL FEATURES ........................................................................... 1 CRANIOSCHISIS ...................................................................................................................................... 1 Encephalocele (s. Cephalocele) ........................................................................................................ 2 SPINA BIFIDA ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Myelomeningocele ........................................................................................................................... 4 DIAGNOSIS...............................................................................................................................................
  • The Early Origin of Vertebral Anomalies, As Illustrated by a 'Butterfly Vertebra'

    The Early Origin of Vertebral Anomalies, As Illustrated by a 'Butterfly Vertebra'

    J. Anat. (1986), 149, pp. 157-169 157 With 7 figures Printed in Great Britain The early origin of vertebral anomalies, as illustrated by a 'butterfly vertebra' F. MULLER, R. O'RAHILLY AND D. R. BENSON Carnegie Laboratories ofEmbryology, California Primate Research Centre and Departments ofHuman Anatomy, Neurology, and Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, Davis, California 95616, U.S.A. (Accepted 30 January 1986) INTRODUCTION Histological reports of vertebral malformations in the human embryo and early fetus are extremely rare, e.g. sagittal clefts at 17-25 mm (Orts Llorca, Ruano Gil & Jimenez Collado, 1962) and at 21 mm (Feller & Stemnberg, 1930). The present example of a 'butterfly vertebra' in an otherwise normal, early human fetus pro- vided an opportunity to devise a developmental timetable for the appearance of this and similar congenital vertebral anomalies. MATERIALS AND METHODS The anomaly, which had not been noted externally, was discovered in sections of the vertebral column in a fetus (listed as S6 in the Gardner-Gray-O'Rahilly Collection) of 63 mm in greatest length (and hence approximately 10 postovulatory weeks in age). The foot length was 11 mm and the weight was 25 g. As part of a project on vertebral development, the vertebral column had been isolated (Fig. 1), sectioned sagittally at 25 ,um and the sections stained by a modified Mallory azan technique. Graphic reconstructions of both the affected and the adjacent thoracic vertebrae were prepared from projection drawings of every second or every third section. Reconstructions similar to those of thoracic vertebrae 8 and 9 of the anomalous 63 mm fetus were made from horizontal sections of a normal 69 mm fetus (No.
  • Congenital CNS Anomalies (General)

    GENERAL - CONGENITAL CNS ANOMALIES Dev1 (1) GENERAL - Congenital CNS Anomalies Last updated: September 5, 2017 CLASSIFICATION ...................................................................................................................................... 1 ETIOPATHOPHYSIOLOGY ......................................................................................................................... 2 EPIDEMIOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................ 2 DIAGNOSIS................................................................................................................................................ 2 CLASSIFICATION ABNORMAL FORMATION OF NOTOCHORD (neurenteric canal disorders): 1) neuro-enteric cyst – due to neurenteric canal persistence. 2) diastematomyelia, diplomyelia – aberrant neuro-entodermal adhesions → split notochord and secondary splitting of neural plate and vertebral bodies. NEURAL TUBE (s. NEURULATION) defects (s. dysraphia, abnormalities of DORSAL induction) - earliest to appear (17-27 days of gestation): 1. Craniorachischisis totalis - total failure of neural tube closure → brain and spinal cord necrosis secondary to exposure to amniotic fluid. iniencephaly = occipital bone defect + cervical dysraphism + head retroflexion. 2. CRANIOSCHISIS, s. CRANIUM BIFIDUM (defects of cranial neuropore closure): anencephaly, exencephaly, encephaloceles, cranial meningoceles. 3. SPINA BIFIDA: a) spina bifida occulta - skin is intact
  • The Changing Landscape in the Genetic Etiology of Human Tooth Agenesis

    The Changing Landscape in the Genetic Etiology of Human Tooth Agenesis

    G C A T T A C G G C A T genes Review The Changing Landscape in the Genetic Etiology of Human Tooth Agenesis Meredith A. Williams 1 and Ariadne Letra 2,3,4,* ID 1 University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Dentistry, Houston, TX 77054, USA; [email protected] 2 Department of Diagnostic and Biomedical Sciences, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Dentistry, Houston, TX 77054, USA 3 Center for Craniofacial Research, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Dentistry, Houston, TX 77054, USA 4 Pediatric Research Center, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston McGovern Medical School, Houston, TX 77030, USA * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-713-486-4228 Received: 3 April 2018; Accepted: 9 May 2018; Published: 16 May 2018 Abstract: Despite much progress in understanding the genetics of syndromic tooth agenesis (TA), the causes of the most common, isolated TA remain elusive. Recent studies have identified novel genes and variants contributing to the etiology of TA, and revealed new pathways in which tooth development genes belong. Further, the use of new research approaches including next-generation sequencing has provided increased evidence supporting an oligogenic inheritance model for TA, and may explain the phenotypic variability of the condition. In this review, we present current knowledge about the genetic mechanisms underlying syndromic and isolated TA in humans, and highlight the value of incorporating next-generation sequencing approaches to identify causative and/or modifier genes that contribute to the etiology of TA.