Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

So in birds, sex chromosome arrangement is a reverse of what we have in humans. Their males are ZZ and the female is ZW. Which is why only males appear from this parthenogenesis.


Right.

From my very shallow understanding:

- The fact that females are defined by unmatched sex chromosomes rather than matched ones means that in haploid parthenogenesis (a split and rejoining of a single half of a genome, rather than fertilisation by male and female sex cells), the resultant sex cells are either ZZ (vialble male) or WW (nonviable "super-female").

- Parthenogenesis in mammals on a similar basis isn't possible as the umatched chromsome is found in males (giving a viable XX female) ... but without an ovum or womb. A self-replicating female egg would be XX.[1] There's ... some research into parthenogenesis in mammals, and at least one apparent observed instance.[2]

- In the case of Avian or similarly Z/W species, parthogenesis is a potentially viable option for resuming sexual reproduction of a population in which all males have been lost. For mammallian populations, not so much. In any case, there'd likely be an extreme genetic bottleneck.

________________________________

Notes:

1. Religious implications for spontaneous mammalian parthogenesis resulting in male offspring are left ... undiscussed.

2. See Google Scholar for a literature overview: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=7%2C39&q=par...


> Which is why only males appear from this parthenogenesis

Could you explain the mechanism? If the female has both chromosomes, why couldn't it produce offspring with both?


The mechanisms of parthonenogensis aren't fully characterized, but at a high level, it occurs in a secondary oocyte during meiosis II -- the oocyte only starts out with a Z or W chromosome.

It's perhaps best shown in this figure: https://rep.bioscientifica.com/view/journals/rep/155/6/image...

(Via this paper: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29559496/)


The mostly likely path to parthenogenesis in a ZW female is making ZZ and WW offspring, and the WW is usually not viable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthenogenesis#Sex_of_the_off...


If the females are ZW, why can't they make WW or ZW?


ZW is less likely because normally parthenogenesis starts with a haploid egg cell (Z or W) that undergoes meiosis alone, copying its own chromosomes - becoming ZZ if it started as Z and WW if it started as W. WW is normally not viable, just like YY in mammals, so the most likely case of parthenogenesis by far is ZZ, male.


So in this case, the ZZ offspring is a genetic clone of its grandfather? That's the only sense I can make of it.

No, wait, half clone. Yup, I'm fully confused by this turn of events.


It's a "clone" of half of the mother's DNA. The mother had random inheritance from its parents. So it's not a clone of the grandparents, but it's a copy of (half of the) mix that the mother had.


No, it's more like an extreme case of in-breeding.

On the other hand, if a mammal were to produce a viable fertile offspring through parthenogenesis, then that offspring would be a clone of it's mother.


Meant to say: mammal mother produces a viable offspring through parthenogenesis, which in mammals would be XX, a daughter, an in-bred individual. Now, if that daughter produces another daughter through parthenogenesis, then this second generation of parthenogenesis individual would be a clone of the first generation daughter.


Thank you!


Was Jurassic park wrong then?




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: