Cited by 185Bioinformatics and Genomic NetworksGene Regulatory Network AnalysisEvolution and Genetic Dynamics

Shadows of complexity: what biological networks reveal about epistasis and pleiotropy

Open access
Tyler, Anna L., Asselbergs, Folkert W., Williams, Scott M., Moore, Jason H.·2009·BioEssays

Abstract

Pleiotropy, in which one mutation causes multiple phenotypes, has traditionally been seen as a deviation from the conventional observation in which one gene affects one phenotype. Epistasis, or gene–gene interaction, has also been treated as an exception to the Mendelian one gene–one phenotype paradigm. This simplified perspective belies the pervasive complexity of biology and hinders progress toward a deeper understanding of biological systems. We assert that epistasis and pleiotropy are not isolated occurrences, but ubiquitous and inherent properties of biomolecular networks. These phenomena should not be treated as exceptions, but rather as fundamental components of genetic analyses. A systems level understanding of epistasis and pleiotropy is, therefore, critical to furthering our understanding of human genetics and its contribution to common human disease. Finally, graph theory offers an intuitive and powerful set of tools with which to study the network bases of these important genetic phenomena.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/bies.200800022

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Joint modeling of patient phenotypic features is essential for identifying genetic mutations with pleiotropic effects.

    “This joint modeling of patient phenotypic features is essential for identifying genetic mutations with pleiotropic effects74–76.”

    From Few shot learning for phenotype-driven diagnosis of patients with rare genetic diseases (2025) · cites this paper as [74]

    The Pleiotropy section describes mutations that produce multiple phenotypes, and Biological Networks says their effects become apparent when the genetic network is analyzed in totality. The paper does not say that jointly modeling patients’ phenotypic features is essential for identifying those mutations; its argument concerns analysis of molecular networks, not patient-feature modeling. (LLM, conf=0.79)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [53]Waddington CH 1959 Canalization of development and genetic assimilation of acquired characters Nature 183 1654 1655 13666847

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tyler, A. L., Asselbergs, F. W., Williams, S. M., & Moore, J. H.
Affiliations
  • Dartmouth College (US)
  • University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
Corresponding author
Moore, Jason H.
Venue
BioEssays
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-02
Volume
31
Issue
2
Pages
220-227
ISSN
  • 0265-9247 (ISSN-L)
  • 1521-1878
OpenAlex
W1964525882
Cited by
185
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 10
FWCI
1.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BioEssays (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (R01AI059694)
  • U.S. National Library of Medicine (R01LM009012, R01LM010098)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene Regulatory Network Analysis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
Keywords
epistasis, pleiotropy, gene-gene interaction, biological networks, biomolecular networks, Mendelian inheritance, systems genetics, graph theory, human disease genetics
MeSH terms
Epistasis, Genetic, Humans, Phenotype, Gene Regulatory Networks

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review