Mice with maternal duplication for proximal chromosome 6 (Chr 6) die in utero before 11.5 dpc, an effect that can be attributed to genomic imprinting. Previous studies have defined the region of Chr 6 responsible as lying proximal to the T6Ad translocation breakpoint in G-band 6B3. Evidence presented here with a new Chr 6 translocation T77H has substantially reduced the size of the imprinting region, locating it between G-band 6A3.2 and the centromere. The paternally expressed imprinted gene Mest had been mapped within the original imprinting region and was therefore a candidate for the early embryonic lethality. FISH has shown that Mest locates distal to T77H and therefore outside the redefined imprinting region. This evidence confirms that Mest is not a candidate for the early embryonic lethality found with two maternal copies of proximal Chr 6. Furthermore mice with maternal duplication for Ch 6 distal to T77H (MatDp.dist6) were found to be growth retarded at birth, the weight reduction remaining similar until adulthood. It can be concluded that the growth retardation is established in utero and is maintained at a similar level from birth to adulthood. Therefore Mest locates in a new imprinting region, distal to G-band 6A3.2 which affects growth. A targeted mutation of Mest has been reported that exhibits growth retardation, reduced postnatal survival and abnormal maternal behaviour. Here the phenotype of MatDp.dist6 mice is compared to that of Mest-deficient mutant mice. Unlike the latter, MatDp.dist6 mice have good survival rates and females have normal maternal behaviour. Possible reasons for these differences are discussed.   

1.
Beechey CV: Imprinted genes and regions in mouse and human, in Ohlsson R (ed): Genomic Imprinting: An Interdisciplinary Approach. Results and Problems in Cell Differentiation, pp 303–323 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin 1999).
2.
Beechey CV, Evans EP: Standard Ideogram/Anomaly Breakpoints of the Mouse (URL: http://www. mgu.har.mrc.ac.uk/imprinting/implink.html) (2000).
3.
Beechey CV, Cattanach BM, Selley, RL: Mouse Imprinting Data and References (URL: http://www. mgu.har.mrc.ac.uk/imprinting/implink.html) (2000).
4.
Buckle VJ, Rack KA: Fluorescent in situ hybridisation, in Davies KE (ed): Human genetic disease analysis, a practical approach, 2nd ed, pp 59–80 (IRL Press, Oxford 1993).
5.
Cattanach BM, Beechey CV: Genomic imprinting in the mouse: possible final analysis, in Reik W, Surani V (eds): Genomic Imprinting: Frontiers in Molecular Biology, vol 18, pp 118–145 (IRL Press, Oxford 1997).
6.
Evans EP: Standard normal chromosomes, in Lyon MF, Rastan S, Brown SDM (eds): Genetic Variants and Strains of the Laboratory Mouse, 3rd ed, pp 1446–1450 (Oxford University Press, Oxford 1996).
7.
Kaneko-Ishino T, Kuroiwa Y, Miyoshi N, Kohda T, Suzuki R, Yokoyama M, Viville S, Barton SC, Ishino F, Surani MA: Peg1/Mest imprinted gene on chromosome 6 identified by cDNA subtraction hybridisation. Nature Genet 11:52–59 (1995).
8.
Kobayashi S, Kohda T, Miyoshi N, Kuroiwa Y, Aisaka K, Tsutsumi O, Kaneko-Ishino T, Ishino F: Human PEG1/MEST, an imprinted gene on chromosome 7. Hum Mol Genet 6:781–786 (1997).
9.
Konecki DS, Brennand J, Fuscoe JC, Caskey CT, Chinault AC: Hypoxanthinine-guanine phosphoribosyltransferase genes of the mouse and Chinese hamster: Construction and sequence analysis of cDNA recombinants. Nucl Acids Res 10:6763–6775 (1982).
10.
Lefebvre L, Viville S, Barton SC, Ishino F, Keverne EB, Surani MA: Abnormal maternal behaviour and growth retardation associated with loss of the imprinted gene Mest. Nature Genet 20:163–169 (1998).
11.
Lee JH, Park CW, Hahn Y, Lee JJ: Mit1/Lb9 and Copg2, new members of mouse imprinted genes closely linked to Peg1/Mest. FEBS Letters 472: 230–234 (2000).
12.
MGD: Mouse Genome Database (URL: http://www.informatics.jax.org/) (2000).
13.
Piras G, El Kharroubi A, Kozlov S, Escalante-Alcalde D, Hernandez L, Copeland NG, Gilbert DJ, Jenkins NA, Stewart CL: Zac1 (Lot1), a potential tumor suppressor gene, and the gene for E-Sarcoglycan are maternally imprinted genes: Identification by a subtractive screen of novel uniparental fibroblast lines. Mol cell Biol 20:3308–3315 (2000).
14.
Riesewijk, AM, Hu L, Schulz U, Tariverdian G, Hoglund P, Kere J, Ropers H-H, Kalscheur VM: Monoallelic expression of human PEG1/MEST is paralleled by parent-specific methylation in fetuses. Genomics 42:236–244 (1997).
15.
Sado T, Nakajima N, Tada M, Takagi N: A novel mesoderm-specific cDNA isolated from a mouse embryonal carcinoma cell line. Dev Growth Diff 5:551–560 (1993).
16.
Searle AG, Ford CE, Beechey CV: Meiotic disjunction in mouse translocations and the determination of centromere position. Genet Res Camb 18:215–235 (1971).
17.
Spence JE, Perciaccante RG, Greg GM, Willard HF, Ledbetter DH, Hejtmancik JF, Pollack MS, O’Brian WE, Beaudet AL: Uniparental disomy as a mechanism for human genetic disease. Am J hum Genet 42:217–226 (1988).
18.
Spotila LD, Sereda L, Prockop DJ: Partial isodisomy for maternal chromosome 7 and short stature in an individual with a mutation at the COLIA2 locus. Am J hum Genet 51:1396–1405 (1992).
19.
Voss R, Ben-Simon E, Avital A, Godfrey S, Zlotogora J, Dagan J, Tikochinski Y, Hillel J: Isodisomy of chromosome 7 in a patient with cystic fibrosis: could uniparental disomy be common in humans? Am J hum Genet 45:373–380 (1989).
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.