Recent studies have implicated alpha-satellite DNA as an integral part of the centromere, important for the normal segregation of human chromosomes. To explore the relationship between the normal functioning centromere and alpha-satellite DNA, we have studied eight accessory marker chromosomes in which fluorescence in-situ hybridization could detect neither pancentromeric nor chromosome-specific alpha-satellite DNA. These accessory marker chromosomes were present in the majority of or all cells analyzed and appeared mitotically stable, thereby indicating the presence of a functional centromere. FISH analysis with both chromosome-specific libraries and single-copy YACs, together with microsatellite DNA studies, allowed unequivocal identification of both the origin and structure of these chromosomes. All but one of the marker chromosomes were linear mirror image duplications, and they were present along with either two additional normal chromosomes or with one normal and one deleted chromosome. Indirect immunofluorescence analysis revealed that the centromere protein CENP-B was not present on these markers; however, both CENP-C and CENP-E were present at a position defining a 'neo-centromere'. These studies provide insight into a newly defined class of marker chromosomes that lack detectable alpha-satellite DNA. At least for such marker chromosomes, alpha-satellite DNA at levels detectable by FISH appears unnecessary for chromosome segregation or for the association of CENP-C and CENP-E at a functional centromere.

Currently, accepted protocol which has been developed at the Prenatal Diagnosis Laboratory of New York City (PDL) requires that when a chromosome abnormality is found in one or more cells in one flask, another 20-40 cells must be examined from one or two additional flasks. Chromosome mosaicism is diagnosed only when an identical abnormality is detected in cells from two or more flasks. In a recent PDL series of 12,000 cases studied according to this protocol, we diagnosed 801 cases (6.68 per cent) of single-cell pseudomosaicism (SCPM), 126 cases (1.05 per cent) of multiple-cell pseudomosaicism (MCPM), and 24 cases (0.2 per cent) of true mosaicism. Pseudomosaicism (PM) involving a structural abnormality was a frequent finding (2/3 of SCPM and 3/5 of MCPM), with an unbalanced structural abnormality in 55 per cent of SCPM and 24 per cent of MCPM. We also reviewed all true mosaic cases (a total of 50) diagnosed in the first 22,000 PDL cases. Of these 50 cases, 23 were sex chromosome mosaics and 27 had autosomal mosaicism; 48 cases had numerical abnormalities and two had structural abnormalities. Twenty-five cases of mosaicism were diagnosed in the first 20 cells from two flasks, i.e., without additional work-up, whereas the other 25 cases required extensive work-up to establish a diagnosis (12 needed additional cell counts from the initial two culture flasks; 13 required harvesting a third flask for cell analysis). Our data plus review of other available data led us to conclude that rigorous efforts to diagnose true mosaicism have little impact in many instances, and therefore are not cost-effective. On the basis of all available data, a work-up for potential mosaicism involving a sex chromosome aneuploidy or structural abnormality should have less priority than a work-up for a common viable autosomal trisomy. We recommend revised guidelines for dealing with (1) a numerical versus a structural abnormality and (2) an autosomal versus a sex chromosome numerical aneuploidy. Emphasis should be placed on autosomes known to be associated with phenotypic abnormalities. These new guidelines, which cover both flask and in situ methods, should result in more effective prenatal cytogenetic diagnosis and reduced patient anxiety.

One hundred and three cases with prenatal diagnosis of trisomy 20 mosaicism through amniocentesis were reviewed. Approximately 90 per cent (90/101) of the cases were associated with grossly normal phenotype. It is likely that, in the majority of cases, cells with trisomy 20 were extraembryonic in origin or largely confined to the placenta. However, in some cases, the cells with trisomy 20 were confined to certain specific fetal organs or tissues such as kidney, skin, etc. Cytogenetic follow-up studies in liveborns should include a culture from urine sediment.

Uniparental disomy (UPD) for several chromosomes has been associated with disease phenotypes. Maternal UPD for chromosome 14 has been described and has a characteristic abnormal phenotype. Paternal UPD14 is rare and only three previous cases have been reported. We describe a new case of paternal UPD for chromosome 14 in an infant with a 45,XX,der(13q;14q) karyotype, which was confirmed by molecular analysis. The proposita had findings similar to those of the previous cases of patUPD14 and we conclude that there is a characteristic patUPD14 syndrome most likely due to imprinting effects. Couples with Robertsonian translocations involving chromosome 14 should be counseled as to the possibility of UPD14 and the option of prenatal diagnosis when indicated.