Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2000 Feb;66(2):480-93.
doi: 10.1086/302762.

Survey of the fragile X syndrome CGG repeat and the short-tandem-repeat and single-nucleotide-polymorphism haplotypes in an African American population

D C Crawford  1 , C E Schwartz, K L Meadows, J L Newman, L F Taft, C Gunter, W T Brown, N J Carpenter, P N Howard-Peebles, K G Monaghan, S L Nolin, A L Reiss, G L Feldman, E M Rohlfs, S T Warren, S L Sherman
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Survey of the fragile X syndrome CGG repeat and the short-tandem-repeat and single-nucleotide-polymorphism haplotypes in an African American population

D C Crawford et al. Am J Hum Genet. 2000 Feb.

Abstract

Previous studies have shown that specific short-tandem-repeat (STR) and single-nucleotide-polymorphism (SNP)-based haplotypes within and among unaffected and fragile X white populations are found to be associated with specific CGG-repeat patterns. It has been hypothesized that these associations result from different mutational mechanisms, possibly influenced by the CGG structure and/or cis-acting factors. Alternatively, haplotype associations may result from the long mutational history of increasing instability. To understand the basis of the mutational process, we examined the CGG-repeat size, three flanking STR markers (DXS548-FRAXAC1-FRAXAC2), and one SNP (ATL1) spanning 150 kb around the CGG repeat in unaffected (n=637) and fragile X (n=63) African American populations and compared them with unaffected (n=721) and fragile X (n=102) white populations. Several important differences were found between the two ethnic groups. First, in contrast to that seen in the white population, no associations were observed among the African American intermediate or "predisposed" alleles (41-60 repeats). Second, two previously undescribed haplotypes accounted for the majority of the African American fragile X population. Third, a putative "protective" haplotype was not found among African Americans, whereas it was found among whites. Fourth, in contrast to that seen in whites, the SNP ATL1 was in linkage equilibrium among African Americans, and it did not add new information to the STR haplotypes. These data indicate that the STR- and SNP-based haplotype associations identified in whites probably reflect the mutational history of the expansion, rather than a mutational mechanism or pathway.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Location and nomenclature of FRAXA interspersion patterns and STR- and SNP-based haplotypes. This figure was adapted from Eichler et al. (1996). We show here the position of the STR and SNP markers relative to the FRAXA CGG repeat. We also included the FRAXE GCC repeat, the STR marker DXS1691, and the recently described polymorphism within DXS548 (DXS548-P). The numbers above the marker represent the allele assignment and the numbers in parentheses represent the base-pair size, according to our protocol. The numbering systems and interspersion-pattern nomenclature are from Eichler et al. (1996) and Murray et al. (1996). We have extended the numbering system for DXS548 and FRAXAC2 to include the alleles not previously described in a white population. All STR-based haplotypes are constructed as follows: 5′-DXS548-P (if there is an insertion or deletion event)-DXS548-FRAXAC1-FRAXAC2-3′. Interspersion patterns are described as the number of consecutive CGGs followed by a plus sign (+) to designate the presence of an AGG interruption.
Figure 2
Figure 2
A, DXS548; B, DXS548-P; C, FRAXAC1; and D, FRAXAC2 allele distributions in whites (n=721; unshaded bars) and African Americans (n=637; shaded bars). Absolute numbers are reported above each bar for each allele of each locus in both populations.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

Electronic-Database Information

    1. Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM), http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Omim (for fragile X syndrome [MIM 309550])

References

    1. Arrieta I, Gil A, Nunez T, Elez M, Artinez B, Criado B, Stao C (1999) Stability of the FMR1 CGG repeat in a Basque sample. Hum Biol 71:55–68 - PubMed
    1. Ashley-Koch AE, Robinson H, Glicksman AE, Nolin SL, Schwartz CE, Brown WT, Turner G, et al (1998) Examination of factors associated with instability of the FMR1 CGG repeat. Am J Hum Genet 63:776–785 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brown TC, Tarleton JC, Go RC, Longshore JW, Descartes M (1997) Instability of the FMR2 trinucleotide repeat region associated with expanded FMR1 alleles. Am J Med Genet 73:447–455 - PubMed
    1. Brown WT, Houck GEJ, Jeziorowska A, Levinson FN, Ding X, Dobkin C, Zhong N, et al (1993) Rapid fragile X carrier screening and prenatal diagnosis using a nonradioactive PCR test. JAMA 270:1569–1575 [published erratum appears in JAMA 271:28] - PubMed
    1. Brown WT, Zhong N, Dobkin C (1996) Positive fragile X microsatellite associations point to a common mechanism of dynamic mutation evolution. Am J Hum Genet 58:641–643 - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Substances