Erratum to: The rate of meiotic gene conversion varies by sex and age (Nature Genetics, (2016), 48, 11, (1377-1384), 10.1038/ng.3669);The rate of meiotic gene conversion varies by sex and age

Nature Genetics

Volumn 48, Issue 11, 2016, Pages 1377-1384

  Halldorsson, Bjarni V ^a,b   Hardarson, Marteinn T ^a   Kehr, Birte ^a   Styrkarsdottir, Unnur ^a   Gylfason, Arnaldur ^a   Thorleifsson, Gudmar ^a   Zink, Florian ^a   Jonasdottir, Adalbjorg ^a   Jonasdottir, Aslaug ^a   Sulem, Patrick ^a   Masson, Gisli ^a   Thorsteinsdottir, Unnur ^a,c   Helgason, Agnar ^a,c   Kong, Augustine ^a   Gudbjartsson, Daniel F ^a,c   Stefansson, Kari ^a,c  

^a DECODE GENETICS   (Iceland)

^b REYKJAVIK UNIVERSITY   (Iceland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ICELAND   (Iceland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DOUBLE STRANDED DNA;

ADULT; AGE; ALLELE; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DNA BASE COMPOSITION; DOUBLE STRANDED DNA BREAK; FATHER; FEMALE; GENE CONVERSION; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; INDEL MUTATION; MALE; MATERNAL AGE; MEIOSIS; MOTHER; OOCYTE; PATERNAL AGE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEX DIFFERENCE; SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE POLYMORPHISM; CHILD; SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT;

ADULT; BASE COMPOSITION; CHILD; FEMALE; GENE CONVERSION; HUMANS; MALE; MATERNAL AGE; MEIOSIS; POLYMORPHISM, SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE; SEX CHARACTERISTICS;

EID: 84988353525     PISSN: 10614036     EISSN: 15461718     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/s41588-018-0228-3     Document Type: Erratum

References (52)

1. Sun, H., Treco, D., Schultes, N.P. & Szostak, J.W. Double-strand breaks at an initiation site for meiotic gene conversion. Nature 338, 87-90 (1989).
2. Lam, I. & Keeney, S. Mechanism and regulation of meiotic recombination initiation. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 7, a016634 (2014).
3. Baudat, F. et al. PRDM9 is a major determinant of meiotic recombination hotspots in humans and mice. Science 327, 836-840 (2010).
4. Haber, J. Genome Stability (Garland Science, 2013).
5. McMahill, M.S., Sham, C.W. & Bishop, D.K. Synthesis-dependent strand annealing in meiosis. PLoS Biol. 5, e299 (2007).
6. Jeffreys, A.J. & May, C.A. Intense and highly localized gene conversion activity in human meiotic crossover hot spots. Nat. Genet. 36, 151-156 (2004).
7. Odenthal-Hesse, L., Berg, I.L., Veselis, A., Jeffreys, A.J. & May, C.A. Transmission distortion affecting human noncrossover but not crossover recombination: a hidden source of meiotic drive. PLoS Genet. 10, e1004106 (2014).
8. Cole, F. et al. Mouse tetrad analysis provides insights into recombination mechanisms and hotspot evolutionary dynamics. Nat. Genet. 46, 1072-1080 (2014).
9. Allers, T. & Lichten, M. Differential timing and control of noncrossover and crossover recombination during meiosis. Cell 106, 47-57 (2001).
10. Szostak, J.W., Orr-Weaver, T.L., Rothstein, R.J. & Stahl, F.W. The double-strand-break repair model for recombination. Cell 33, 25-35 (1983).
11. Galtier, N., Piganeau, G., Mouchiroud, D. & Duret, L. GC-content evolution in mammalian genomes: the biased gene conversion hypothesis. Genetics 159, 907-911 (2001).
12. Glémin, S. et al. Quantifcation of GC-biased gene conversion in the human genome. Genome Res. 25, 1215-1228 (2015).
13. Duret, L. & Galtier, N. Biased gene conversion and the evolution of mammalian genomic landscapes. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 10, 285-311 (2009).
14. Narasimhan, V.M. et al. A direct multi-generational estimate of the human mutation rate from autozygous segments seen in thousands of parentally related individuals. Preprint at bioRxiv http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/059436 (2016).
15. Palamara, P.F. et al. Leveraging distant relatedness to quantify human mutation and gene-conversion rates. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 97, 775-789 (2015).
16. Lachance, J. & Tishkoff, S.A. Biased gene conversion skews allele frequencies in human populations, increasing the disease burden of recessive alleles. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 95, 408-420 (2014).
17. Kong, A. et al. Fine-scale recombination rate differences between sexes, populations and individuals. Nature 467, 1099-1103 (2010).
18. Kong, A. et al. A high-resolution recombination map of the human genome. Nat. Genet. 31, 241-247 (2002).
19. Kong, A. et al. Recombination rate and reproductive success in humans. Nat. Genet. 36, 1203-1206 (2004).
20. Williams, A.L. et al. Non-crossover gene conversions show strong GC bias and unexpected clustering in humans. eLife 4, e04637 (2015).
21. Guillon, H., Baudat, F. , Grey, C., Liskay, R.M. & de Massy, B. Crossover and noncrossover pathways in mouse meiosis. Mol. Cell 20, 563-573 (2005).
22. Webb, A.J., Berg, I.L. & Jeffreys, A. Sperm cross-over activity in regions of the human genome showing extreme breakdown of marker association. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 105, 10471-10476 (2008).
23. Gudbjartsson, D.F. et al. Sequence variants from whole genome sequencing a large group of Icelanders. Sci. Data 2, 150011 (2015).
24. Pratto, F. et al. Recombination initiation maps of individual human genomes. Science 346, 1256442 (2014).
25. Kong, A. et al. Common and low-frequency variants associated with genome-wide recombination rate. Nat. Genet. 46, 11-16 (2014).
26. Padhukasahasram, B. & Rannala, B. Meiotic gene-conversion rate and tract length variation in the human genome. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ ejhg.2013.30 (2013).
27. Barrett, J.C. & Cardon, L.R. Evaluating coverage of genome-wide association studies. Nat. Genet. 38, 659-662 (2006).
28. Pardo-Manuel de Villena, F. & Sapienza, C. Recombination is proportional to the number of chromosome arms in mammals. Mamm. Genome 12, 318-322 (2001).
29. Duret, L. & Arndt, P.F. The impact of recombination on nucleotide substitutions in the human genome. PLoS Genet. 4, e1000071 (2008).
30. Martin, H.C. et al. Multicohort analysis of the maternal age effect on recombination. Nat. Commun. 6, 7846 (2015).
31. Myers, S., Freeman, C., Auton, A., Donnelly, P. & McVean, G. A common sequence motif associated with recombination hot spots and genome instability in humans. Nat. Genet. 40, 1124-1129 (2008).
32. Frazer, K.A. et al. A second generation human haplotype map of over 3.1 million SNPs. Nature 449, 851-861 (2007).
33. Assis, R. & Kondrashov, A.S. A strong deletion bias in nonallelic gene conversion. PLoS Genet. 8, e1002508 (2012).
34. Leushkin, E.V. & Bazykin, G.A. Short indels are subject to insertion-biased gene conversion. Evolution 67, 2604-2613 (2013).
35. Gudbjartsson, D.F. et al. Large-scale whole-genome sequencing of the Icelandic population. Nat. Genet. 47, 435-444 (2015).
36. 1000 Genomes Project Consortium. An integrated map of genetic variation from 1,092 human genomes. Nature 491, 56-65 (2012).
37. Handel, M.A. & Schimenti, J.C. Genetics of mammalian meiosis: regulation, dynamics and impact on fertility. Nat. Rev. Genet. 11, 124-136 (2010).
38. Subramanian, V.V. & Bickel, S.E. Aging predisposes oocytes to meiotic nondisjunction when the cohesin subunit SMC1 is reduced. PLoS Genet. 4, e1000263 (2008).
39. Weng, K.A., Jeffreys, C.A. & Bickel, S.E. Rejuvenation of meiotic cohesion in oocytes during prophase I is required for chiasma maintenance and accurate chromosome segregation. PLoS Genet. 10, e1004607 (2014).
40. Leland, S. et al. Heterozygosity for a Bub1 mutation causes female-specifc germ cell aneuploidy in mice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106, 12776-12781 (2009).
41. Hodges, C.A., Revenkova, E., Jessberger, R., Hassold, T.J. & Hunt, P.A. SMC1β-defcient female mice provide evidence that cohesins are a missing link in age-related nondisjunction. Nat. Genet. 37, 1351-1355 (2005).
42. Nagaoka, S.I., Hassold, T.J. & Hunt, P.A. Human aneuploidy: mechanisms and new insights into an age-old problem. Nat. Rev. Genet. 13, 493-504 (2012).
43. Campbell, C.L., Furlotte, N.A., Eriksson, N., Hinds, D. & Auton, A. Escape from crossover interference increases with maternal age. Nat. Commun. 6, 6260 (2015).
44. Martini, E. et al. Genome-wide analysis of heteroduplex DNA in mismatch repair- defcient yeast cells reveals novel properties of meiotic recombination pathways. PLoS Genet. 7, e1002305 (2011).
45. Tsaponina, O. & Haber, J.E. Frequent interchromosomal template switches during gene conversion in S. cerevisiae. Mol. Cell 55, 615-625 (2014).
46. de Boer, E., Jasin, M. & Keeney, S. Local and sex-specifc biases in crossover vs. noncrossover outcomes at meiotic recombination hot spots in mice. Genes Dev. 29, 1721-1733 (2015).
47. Wong, W.S.W. et al. New observations on maternal age effect on germline de novo mutations. Nat. Commun. 7, 10486 (2016).
48. Goldmann, J.M. et al. Parent-of-origin-specifc signatures of de novo mutations. Nat. Genet. 48, 935-939 (2016).
49. Kong, A. et al. Rate of de novo mutations and the importance of father's age to disease risk. Nature 488, 471-475 (2012).
50. Efron, B. & Tibshirani, R.J. An Introduction to the Bootstrap (CRC Press, 1994).
51. Ihaka, R. & Gentleman, R.R. A language for data analysis and graphics. J. Comput. Graph. Stat. 5, 299-314 (1996).
52. van Rossum, G. & Drake, F.L. PYTHON Reference Manual (Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica, 1995).