Advanced search

A call out to Geneticists / Biologists

(51 Posts)
BelaLugosisShed Fri 09-Feb-18 08:43:22

On twitter last night and a poster ( Female, gender critical) claimed that human ova actually have a complete set of sex chromosomes rather than half - ‘23 in the outer layer and 23 inside’ and that we don’t actually need Male sperm to reproduce . She claims that it’s a big conspiracy that silences research.
Does anyone know if what she says is even partly correct / not some possible genetic mutation etc. ?
It sounds like science fiction.

SandAndSea Fri 09-Feb-18 08:48:20

My biology is too rusty to help here but I do remember reading that we don't 'need' males to reproduce, but possibly not for that reason... can't remember... Interesting stuff. (Following.)

Ifailed Fri 09-Feb-18 08:50:28

what are these 'inner and outer layers' they refer to?

BeyondWitchbitchterf Fri 09-Feb-18 08:54:58

Umm based on my understanding (and remembering!)... oogenesis pauses between foetal development and ovulation, and at this stage they do have 46 - but just prior to ovulation they finish and when ovulation occurs they only have 23.

I'll see if I can find some info...

BeyondWitchbitchterf Fri 09-Feb-18 08:59:43

Igneococcus Fri 09-Feb-18 09:01:33

I'm a biologist, though except for the occassional yeast or fungus Eukaryotes are not my field of expertise really.
Is she talking about polar bodies maybe?Polar body

TheElementsSong Fri 09-Feb-18 09:03:06

I'm a molecular biologist.

It's bollocks.

(Also, what BeyondWitch posted^).

ChampiontheWonderHamster Fri 09-Feb-18 09:03:23

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BeyondWitchbitchterf Fri 09-Feb-18 09:04:05

That's what I thought, igneo - though how they got "outer layer" and "inside" from that, I'm not sure

deydododatdodontdeydo Fri 09-Feb-18 09:05:52

A little science can be a dangerous thing.
Sounds like they heard something and misinterpreted it.

AttillaThePun Fri 09-Feb-18 09:06:59

What an interesting link, Beyond!

Still and all, OP, the human race has not been capable of parthogenesis, as far as we have been able to determine, for the whole of human history.

So I think your poster may just be a bit...into the woo-woo.

Like the people who claim that men can't be women because of sacred feminine essence or somesuch, as opposed to because females aren't born with penises.

BeyondWitchbitchterf Fri 09-Feb-18 09:09:29

It's not often I'm called on to remember oogenesis - it's usually spermatogensis on the "we all start off female" posts grin

ChampiontheWonderHamster Fri 09-Feb-18 09:12:21

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Igneococcus Fri 09-Feb-18 09:15:32

Everybody else's science always looks more interesting during writing up time champion

BeyondWitchbitchterf Fri 09-Feb-18 09:16:56

I'm just remembering from 2nd year human bio - I'm on my third now and just starting my dissertation (which is nothing to do with reproduction either grin )

IsletsOfLangerhans Fri 09-Feb-18 09:33:27

This sort of links into my Ph.D area of research. You can create embryos parthenogenetically, which are diploid And have two sets of maternal chromosomes. It does not and cannot happen naturally in mammals though. If it did happen, the embryo would fail, due to double doses of maternally imprinted genes. This leads to all sorts of horrendous embryo deformities

BeyondWitchbitchterf Fri 09-Feb-18 09:55:51

Oh I just saw this...

Which specifically says, even in the news article aimed at everybody (not just scientists)...
"The process is very tightly controlled and timed in the human body - some eggs will mature during the teenage years, others more than two decades later.
An egg needs to lose half its genetic material during development, otherwise there would be too much DNA when it was fertilised by a sperm.
This excess is cast off into a miniature cell called a polar body, but in the study the polar bodies were abnormally large."

sawdustformypony Fri 09-Feb-18 09:57:37

I went to a university that was, then, home to the MRC centre for reproductive immunology. I recall a lecture where it was mentioned that experiments had suggested that in some mammal species, the uterus needed to have the immunological challenge of non-self antigens on the surface of the zygote in order to achieve successful implantation.

LangCleg Fri 09-Feb-18 10:42:18

I love FWR! Adds to my knowledge every day! Thank you, women.

merrymouse Fri 09-Feb-18 10:59:48

OMG! Immaculate conception finally explained!

Mumsnut Fri 09-Feb-18 11:02:32

Val McDermid wrote a thriller about 20 years ago about this: lesbians reproducing without males, with some lab intervention. I assumed she'd invented the science, but maybe not

Blue Genes, it was called.

flowersonthepiano Fri 09-Feb-18 11:11:03

What islets said. Before the egg cell matures it has a full set of chromosomes, however, the reason all female (or all male) mammalian embryos don't develop properly is the need for genetic imprinting. I have a PhD in genetics, although not in this field, I did work down the corridor from a lab that focussed on genetic imprinting.

flowersonthepiano Fri 09-Feb-18 11:12:56

Genetic imprinting explained ☺

flowersonthepiano Fri 09-Feb-18 11:14:33

Clicky link (I hope)

BelaLugosisShed Fri 09-Feb-18 11:24:58

Thanks all 😍
Isn’t genetics fascinating?
I’ve been trying to find the tweet to link but can’t 🧐

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: