Slashdot Mirror


Semi-Identical Twins Discovered

daftna writes in with a story from Nature about a pair of twins who are neither identical nor fraternal: they are semi-identical. Researchers discovered twins who share all of their mother's DNA but only half of their father's. Both children are chimeras — their cells are not genetically uniform, but include a mix of genes from two separate sperm cells that fertilized a single egg. This is, apparently, not as rare as one might think; but the resulting fetus is rarely viable. This report marks the first known incidence of two half-identical twins resulting from a double fertilization.

26 of 224 comments (clear)

  1. Sounds like mom was a busy girl. by alcmaeon · · Score: 5, Funny

    Subject says it all.

    1. Re:Sounds like mom was a busy girl. by maxume · · Score: 5, Funny

      Problems with your sperm count? (lots of guys have more than, ya know, one. Harr).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:Sounds like mom was a busy girl. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Inconceivable!

    3. Re:Sounds like mom was a busy girl. by countach · · Score: 4, Interesting

      One wonders what would happen with child support payments if the two sperms came from a different father. I doubt the rules and regulations know how to deal with that one.

    4. Re:Sounds like mom was a busy girl. by iamacat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is the least of these kids problems. One of the kids has genitals which are in between penis and vagina. Both have inconsistent genetic makeup which is bound to cause health or at least fertility issues. Imagine living a life where you are called "a very special and wonderful person", but no personal life or even ability to enter either public restroom without people looking at you dubiously.

  2. Discovery Health "I'm my own twin" by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We're finding new chimeras every day, now that DNA testing is becoming more common. Discovery Health even had a program where genetic testing showed a mother's children to be the product of her BROTHER and her husband; though she had no brother. Turned out she was a hermaphrodite- some of her cells, including her EGGS, were male- a fraternal twin that had been absorbed early in the gestation process.

    --
    SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    1. Re:Discovery Health "I'm my own twin" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Could a similar event lead to a virgin giving birth? News of such an event could be of Biblical proportions.

    2. Re:Discovery Health "I'm my own twin" by good+soldier+svejk · · Score: 4, Informative

      Chimerism is also a source of the exceedingly rare brindle coat pattern in horses. In such cases the different color hairs will have different DNA. In one case this caused two consecutive DNA sample sent to a lab for pedigree verification to return negative parentage for both the sire and dam, even though the owner had personally witnessed both the fertilization and the birth and hence knew for sure who the foal's parents were. DNA from the stallion's blood samples also showed no evidence of a Y chromosome.

      --
      It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man

      -James Baldwin
    3. Re:Discovery Health "I'm my own twin" by Starburnt · · Score: 5, Funny

      More importantly, Slashdotters may now be able to reproduce.

      That could be of Biblical proportions.

    4. Re:Discovery Health "I'm my own twin" by NIckGorton · · Score: 4, Informative

      Intersex is not the same thing as a hermaphrodite. All hermaphrodites are intersex, but the vast majority of intersex people are not hermaphrodites. To be a human hermaphrodite, you have to have ovarian and testicular tissue in the same person. Most people who are intersex have only ovarian OR testicular tissue. Instead of having both types of gonads there is some problem with sexual development in the womb that results in a person with physical characteristics somewhere on the spectrum between the poles of male and female bodies. (Hence the newer term for intersex conditions: DSD or disorder of sex development.)

      More importantly, if you call a person who is intersex a hermaphrodite many will likely be quite unhappy with you. Its akin to calling a Native American an 'Indian' - not only generally disliked by the people you are labeling but also factually incorrect because of a misunderstanding of what the term means (or on what continent you are located.)

      Nick

    5. Re:Discovery Health "I'm my own twin" by kestasjk · · Score: 4, Informative

      Are you calling the virgin Mary a hermaphrodite?! Blasphemy!

      As we probably all know 'virgin' was indisputably a mistranslation; the Hebrew for 'young woman' (almah) was translated into the Greek for 'virgin' (parthenos). I wonder why we all still refer to her as the virgin Mary, now that we know she wasn't (necessarily, to be absolutely pedantic) a virgin.

      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    6. Re:Discovery Health "I'm my own twin" by JeanPaulBob · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, "virgin" was not "indisputably" a mistranslation. And it is most certain that your "young woman" is a poor translation--to my mind, worse than "virgin".

      The issue is not with the New Testament; there is no question that Mary is reported to have been a virgin in the New Testament. The issue originates with the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament produced by Jews before the time of Christ, and it has to do with the translation of Isaiah 7:14, an ostensibly Messianic prophecy. (The Septuagint was the translation used by New Testament writers.) It translates the Hebrew "almah" with the Greek "parthenos". Parthenos almost always means "virgin", while almah has a slightly different but overlapping semantic range. It's closer to "maid, unmarried girl, young woman of marriageable age". (Your "young woman" leaves out the unmarried/of marriable age implications.) Culturally speaking, an almah most likely would be a virgin--that would be the strong expectation, and it's enough to make "virgin" a connotation of "almah". While parthenos is not a precise translation, it is not a mistranslation. At the very least, not indisputably so. My goodness, man, just read the Wikipedia entry on almah and follow the references! This is not obscure information.

      Sure, if you limit the meaning of "almah" to "young woman", it makes for a better game of "Hee hee, look at the silly Christians," but if you're interested in honest scholarship, you'll have to open your mind a bit.

    7. Re:Discovery Health "I'm my own twin" by Ravon+Rodriguez · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Turning water into wine, walking on water, bringing the dead back to life... and It's the translation of the word "virgin" that you have a problem with?

      --
      Jesus loves me, he loves me a bunch, because he always puts Jiffy in my lunch.
  3. DUP!! by dustball23 · · Score: 5, Funny

    This story was already posted!! Oh, no, wait...

    1. Re: DUP!! by Black+Parrot · · Score: 5, Funny

      We don't get dupes, we get semi-identical posts.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  4. They need a different term besides "Chimera" by The-Bus · · Score: 5, Funny

    I understand it's mythologically correct to use the term "chimera" but whenever I hear it I always envision something else: a ghastly soulless beast with an iron heart, breathing fire out of a cavernous tooth-lined maw, crushing entire houses under gigantic feathered elephant legs; a scaled, whiplike tail kicks up ashy dust clouds as its dragged for miles behind this monstrocity.

    No matter how many times I hear the biological equivalent of the term (which is never as exciting) I'm always let down. I always think some giant monster has been discovered, or someone turned into this monster, or geneticists have new clues as to the cause of this monster.

    It's a bit annoying once I'm letdown but for a precious few seconds I'm always aghast in wonder.

    --

    Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

  5. Serious question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How is this interesting? What are the implications?

    (I'm sure it is, it just seems.. moot to me).

    1. Re:Serious question by tloh · · Score: 4, Interesting

      talk about deja vu!

      Some time ago, I wondered about the exact situation this article raises.

      http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=130374 &cid=10879347

      At the time, it fascinated me because it occured to me that you could have twins which share a maternal set of chromosomes but have one sex chromosome from the father be an X for one of the siblings and the other be a Y.

      In other words, almost identical twin brother/sister pair! One wonders how much of gender is actually in our genes. Well, to have a pair of individuals share so much with the exception of the sex chromosomes - it becomes more reasonable to do an actual comparison. (I am aware there is still lots of room for genetic variation from the rest of the father's somatic set) I don't know how scientific it would be, but as a thought experiment, I wasn't to concerned about it at the time I posted it.

      --
      Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
    2. Re:Serious question by reverseengineer · · Score: 5, Informative
      Well, this case is primarily interesting in the sense of "this thing that very rarely happens, it just happened." The main scientific benefit is that further light is shed on the mechanisms of human reproduction. Obviously, the outlines of that process are well-known, but there's still a lot of uncharted territory when it comes to the non-normal functioning on this process. Reproductive biology is an area where animal models (even in other primates) tend to translate rather poorly to human beings, and is of course also an area with ethical limits on human experimentation. Conceivably, learning about cases like this can advance knowledge about things like infertility and birth defects.

      There's actually an interesting story, almost the flip side of this rare case in humans, running now in the New York Times about marmosets, in which a form of chimerism is quite widespread:

      One of the most surprising results of the study is that over half of male marmosets have chimeric sperm. Dr. Ross and her colleagues discovered cases in which the DNA of male marmosets turned up in babies supposedly fathered by their fraternal twins. In other words, the sperm came from one male, but it had the DNA of the male's brother. A paternity test would show that the baby's genetic father was actually its uncle. The scientists were not able to isolate DNA from marmoset eggs, but they did find that 2 out of 21 marmoset ovaries were chimeric. It's possible that a female marmoset can give birth to nephews and nieces.
      --
      "FDA staff reviewers expressed concern about the number of patients who were left out of the study because they died."
  6. No problem by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 5, Funny
    Problems with your sperm count?

    No I can count up to five, even with one hand busy!

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  7. This isn't new... by 7Prime · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Maybe this was slightly different, but I knew two guys back in high school who were genetically half-identical twins. I guess the condition was caused by the polar body (which normally disentigrates) containing enough cytoplasm to sustain itself, and thus allowing it to be fertilized by a sperm other than its pair. They refered to this as "Polar Body Twins". It is extremely rare, but not unheard of. Furthermore, they really looked the part, being much closer in appearance than fraternal twins, but being subtley different from identical twins.

    There seems to be a hot debate over the possibility of this happening. Some scientists fully support the notion that this happens, while some have rejected the notion altogether, citing that polar body's don't "normally" contain enough cytoplasm to sustain themselves. But this sounds like a rediculous arguement, to me, since the exact amount of cytoplasm that is both required for fertilization, and the exact amount that a polar body usually contain, very wildly.

    Unfortunately, it's very difficult to confirm whether or not this occurs, since percentage of difference in genetics between both fraternal twins and polar body twins is not exact. Polar Body twins will always contain between 50% to 100% of the same genentics (averaging at 75%0, where-as fraternal twins could be anywhere between 0% to 100% similarity. So, my friends will never actually know whether they developed from identical zygotes, but their genetic makeup was similar enough, that many doctors speculated that this was the case.

    --
    Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
  8. Why this is notable: Cortical reaction by wile_e_wonka · · Score: 5, Informative
    I thought I would note why this doesn't happen all the time in humans (in some mammals it is common for an egg to be able to be penetrated by more than one sperm).

    According to my anatomy textbook, after the spem digests its way through the zona pellucida:

    The plasma membranes of the sperm and oocyte then fuse, and the sperm nucleus is engulfed by the oocyte's cytoplasm. This fusion induces the cortical reaction, wherin granules in the oocyte secrete enzymes into the extracellular space beneath the zona pellucida. These enzymes destroy the sperm receptors on the zona pellucida, preventing any other sperm from binding to and entering the egg.

  9. Re:wow, that must be embarassing by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 5, Funny

    Maybe some women should try for this to achieve notoriety and advance the cause of science...

    And the plot for the next gang-bang porno suddenly comes into view.

    --
    In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
  10. Re:wow, that must be embarassing by DavidTC · · Score: 3, Informative

    I don't even want to imagine the scenario that would be required to get two sperm from two different fathers to fertilize one egg at the same time.

    From what I remember from biology, almost all fertilization often happens when the egg drops into place, and the sperm is just hanging around already there. The 'sperm swims to the egg' is a fairly large over-simplification of the process.

    This is how the morning after pill works, it stops the release of the egg so it won't hit the sperm waiting for it, or at least screws the release up long enough that the sperm dies. (Sperm lasts like 24 hours inside a woman, IIRC.)

    So one egg being fertilized from two fathers is not that amazing, timewise. The egg (Or two eggs, or three, or whatever) shows up, and there are two men's sperm waiting for it. Considering the low amount of two sperm fertilizing one egg, the odds of them every happening with two fathers is improbable, but plenty of fraternal twins have different fathers. (Well, 'plenty' is probably overstating it, but it's happened enough that it's not even that neat a trick.)

    Incidentally, there's some study out that that demonstrated that men can sometimes produce sperm that is a good deal less viable, and the main purpose of it appears to be entangling other men's sperm, stopping it from reaching any eggs. And that men who are suspicious of affairs, or just know their lover has other lovers, are more likely to produce said combatant sperm.

    The real amazing trick here is two chimera twins. Human chimeras are fairly unlikely to be healthy, as the two parts often react in bad ways. Although, now that I think about it, if one survived, that logically means the combination 'worked', and thus the other surviving is not that impressive.

    I'm confused as to why they're calling these 'semi-identical' twins, though. They'd be semi-identical if each of them contained a single genetic code that considered of the same part from the mother but with each having a different part from the father. However, they both contain the same genetic codes, so they are, indeed, identical twins. They just have 1.5 times the genetic code of anyone else, with cells in their body randomly containing one code or another.

    What they really are are two semi-chimeras. Parts of their body have half the genetic code differing, instead of all their genetic code differing like normal chimeras. Which is, I guess, why they managed to live. But I seem to recall that a lot of the surviving human chimeras are like this. So they're just unique in being a pair.

    I guess they're 'semi-identical' in the sense that different parts of their bodies might contain different genetic codes. One twin's heart might contain code A, and the other code B, whereas they both have code A eyes and code B hair color.

    --
    If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  11. Already happened. by gcnaddict · · Score: 4, Informative

    It just hasn't happened in humans yet.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6196225. stm

    --
    Viable Slashdot alternatives: https://pipedot.org/ and http://soylentnews.org/
  12. On intersexuality by asninn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Imagine living a life where you are called "a very special and wonderful person", but no personal life or even ability to enter either public restroom without people looking at you dubiously.

    Do you really think that this is the biggest problem intersexual people will ever face in their life? If yes, you seriously need to read up on these things a bit.

    First of all, as a disclaimer, I'm not intersexual myself, but I'm interested in inter- and transsexuality and know a couple of people who are. Most of the intersexuals I know had a gender surgically assigned to them after birth, too (female, FWIW; as doctors say, "it's easier to dig a hole than build a pole"). But you know what? Neither of them is happy.

    In fact, the *exact opposite* is true. *Every single* intersexual I've talked to or heard about has said the same thing so far - that doing so is, essentially, butchering, a traumatic experience that will haunt you for your entire life. Even in these times where sexual reassignmet surgery is not impossible anymore, the results are far inferior to anything that nature came up with (if you can even afford the whole procedure!), and the psychological problems associated with having your body mutilated after birth are just as serious.

    What really needs to be done when an intersexual child is born is really easy: bloody leave them alone. The child will eventually grow up and be able to make their own decisions; if they decide then that they really belong to one gender, it's not too late to do surgery etc.. What's more, it might well be that the child decides that they're really male - contrary to popular opinion, "intersexual" and "transsexual" do not mean "a guy who wants to become a chick".

    But there's also a decent chance that the child will say "I'm happy the way I am", and who's to say that that's not within their rights? If the only reason you can come up with is that there might be confusion over which restroom is appropriate, well... I'm sorry, but that isn't quite enough.

    What's more, when you're talking about things like restroom usage, you make a very fundamental mistake: you look at what other people and society in general will see the child as, rather than what the child themselves thinks. But it's the child who will have to live with their body; the idea that society has a right to say "you don't fit into our binary system, so we'll cut up your body and then pretend that you do (even though you really still don't)" is outrageous.

    FWIW, BTW, another fundamental mistake that's often being made is the assumption that it's even possible to reassign gender - that is, the actual gender that someone identifies as, as opposed to their physical sex. One of the reasons why intersexual people were mutilated in the past and raised as girls is that doctors (wrongly) believed that if you just cut off everything that was non-girly and if you just put the child into a dress and told them they were female, they'd really believe it and grow up as a normal, well-adjusted *woman* - but in reality, it doesn't work, and never has.

    Of course, I do understand that there are no ulterior motives - doctors, parents etc. really are trying to help intersexual children. But it's also important to realise that it's not working and that the only thing you're doing is CAUSING harm, not preventing it.

    So, although this has little do to anymore with the original TFA, just let me say this: leave intersexual children alone, and let them make their own decisions when they're old enough. Until then, be tolerant, be honest, explain to them why they're different, and explain that it doesn't make them worth less or anything like that. That's the ONLY way you can actually help them.

    --
    butter the donkey