Cited by 191Epigenetics and DNA MethylationGenetic Syndromes and ImprintingGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics

An N -ethyl- N -nitrosourea screen for genes involved in variegation in the mouse

Open access
Blewitt, Marnie E., Vickaryous, Nicola K., Hemley, Sarah J., Ashe, Alyson, Bruxner, Timothy J., Preis, Jost I., Arkell, Ruth, Whitelaw, Emma·2005·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

We have developed a sensitized screen to identify genes involved in gene silencing, using random N -ethyl- N -nitrosourea mutagenesis on mice carrying a variegating GFP transgene. The dominant screen has produced six mutant lines, including both suppressors and enhancers of variegation. All are semidominant and five of the six are homozygous embryonic lethal. In one case, the homozygous lethality depends on sex: homozygous females die at midgestation and display abnormal DNA methylation of the X chromosome, whereas homozygous males are viable. Linkage analysis reveals that the mutations map to unique chromosomal locations. We have studied the effect of five of the mutations on expression of an endogenous allele known to be sensitive to epigenetic state, agouti viable yellow . In all cases, there is an effect on penetrance, and in most cases, parent of origin and sex-specific effects are detected. This screen has identified genes that are involved in epigenetic reprogramming of the genome, and the behavior of the mutant lines suggests a common mechanism between X inactivation and transgene and retrotransposon silencing. Our findings raise the possibility that the presence or absence of the X chromosome in mammals affects the establishment of the epigenetic state at autosomal loci by acting as a sink for proteins involved in gene silencing. The study demonstrates the power of sensitized screens in the mouse not only for the discovery of novel genes involved in a particular process but also for the elucidation of the biology of that process.

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 · 10.1073/pnas.0409375102

Cites

37 of 37 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?

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: 34

  1. [1]Reik, W., Dean, W. & Walter, J. (2001) Science 293, 1089–1093. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. [2]Schotta, G., Ebert, A., Dorn, R. & Reuter, G. (2003) Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 14, 67–75. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. [3]Hollick, J. B. & Chandler, V. L. (2001) Genetics 157, 369–378. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. [4]Percec, I., Plenge, R. M., Nadeau, J. H., Bartolomei, M. S. & Willard, H. F. (2002) Science 296, 1136–1139. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. [5]Tsai, T. F., Chen, K. S., Weber, J. S., Justice, M. J. & Beaudet, A. L. (2002) Hum. Mol. Genet. 11, 1659–1668. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. [6]Spofford, J. B. (1961) Genetics 46, 1151–1167. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. [7]Henikoff, S. (1990) Trends Genet. 6, 422–426. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. [8]Dorn, R., Krauss, V., Reuter, G. & Saumweber, H. (1993) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 90, 11376–11380. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. [9]Reuter, G. & Spierer, P. (1992) BioEssays 14, 605–612. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. [10]Martin, D. I. & Whitelaw, E. (1996) BioEssays 18, 919–923. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. [11]Preis, J. I., Downes, M., Oates, N. A., Rasko, J. E. & Whitelaw, E. (2003) Curr. Biol. 13, 955–959. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. [12]Rakyan, V. K., Blewitt, M. E., Druker, R., Preis, J. I. & Whitelaw, E. (2002) Trends Genet. 18, 348–351. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. [13]Bultman, S. J., Michaud, E. J. & Woychik, R. P. (1992) Cell 71, 1195–1204. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. [14]Duhl, D. M., Vrieling, H., Miller, K. A., Wolff, G. L. & Barsh, G. S. (1994) Nat. Genet. 8, 59–65. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. [16]Morgan, H. D., Sutherland, H. G., Martin, D. I. & Whitelaw, E. (1999) Nat. Genet. 23, 314–318. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. [17]Wolff, G. L. (1978) Genetics 88, 529–539. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. [18]Rakyan, V. K., Chong, S., Champ, M. E., Cuthbert, P. C., Morgan, H. D., Luu, K. V. & Whitelaw, E. (2003) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100, 2538–2543. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. [19]Gaudet, F., Rideout, W. M., 3rd, Meissner, A., Dausman, J., Leonhardt, H. & Jaenisch, R. (2004) Mol. Cell. Biol. 24, 1640–1648. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. [20]Birchler, J. A., Bhadra, U., Rabinow, L., Linsk, R. & Nguyen-Huynh, A. T. (1994) Genetics 137, 1057–1070. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. [21]Csink, A. K., Linsk, R. & Birchler, J. A. (1994) Genetics 138, 153–163. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. [22]Davis, A. P., Woychik, R. P. & Justice, M. J. (1999) Mamm. Genome 10, 308–310. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. [23]Neuhaus, I. M., Sommardahl, C. S., Johnson, D. K. & Beier, D. R. (1997) Mamm. Genome 8, 506–509. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. [24]Neuhaus, I. M. & Beier, D. R. (1998) Mamm. Genome 9, 150–154. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. [25]Park, J. G. & Chapman, V. M. (1994) Mol. Cell. Biol. 14, 7975–7983. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. [26]McClive, P. J. & Sinclair, A. H. (2001) Mol. Reprod. Dev. 60, 225–226. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. [27]Reuter, G., Giarre, M., Farah, J., Gausz, J., Spierer, A. & Spierer, P. (1990) Nature 344, 219–223. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. [28]Hitotsumachi, S., Carpenter, D. A. & Russell, W. L. (1985) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 82, 6619–6621. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. [29]Locke, J., Kotarski, M. A. & Tartof, K. D. (1988) Genetics 120, 181–198. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. [30]Garrick, D., Fiering, S., Martin, D. I. & Whitelaw, E. (1998) Nat. Genet. 18, 56–59. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. [31]Linn, F., Heidmann, I., Saedler, H. & Meyer, P. (1990) Mol. Gen. Genet. 222, 329–336. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. [32]Dorer, D. R. & Henikoff, S. (1994) Cell 77, 993–1002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. [33]Pal-Bhadra, M., Leibovitch, B. A., Gandhi, S. G., Rao, M., Bhadra, U., Birchler, J. A. & Elgin, S. C. (2004) Science 303, 669–672. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. [35]Burgoyne, P. S., Thornhill, A. R., Boudrean, S. K., Darling, S. M., Bishop, C. E. & Evans, E. P. (1995) Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London B Sci. 350, 253–260 and discussion 260–261. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. [36]Ray, P. F., Conaghan, J., Winston, R. M. & Handyside, A. H. (1995) J. Reprod. Fertil. 104, 165–171. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Blewitt, M. E., Vickaryous, N. K., Hemley, S. J., Ashe, A., Bruxner, T. J., Preis, J. I., Arkell, R., & Whitelaw, E.
Affiliations
The University of Sydney (AU)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2005-05-12
Volume
102
Issue
21
Pages
7629-7634
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2089778660
Cited by
186
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 11
FWCI
3.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Medical Research Council
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (301955)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Epigenetics and DNA Methylation
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Syndromes and Imprinting
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Keywords
variegation, gene silencing, N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea mutagenesis, GFP transgene, X chromosome inactivation, epigenetic reprogramming, retrotransposon silencing, transposon silencing, embryonic lethality, parent-of-origin effects, penetrance, mouse mutants
MeSH terms
Alleles, Animals, Chromosome Mapping, Ethylnitrosourea, Flow Cytometry, Genetic Testing, Mice, Transgenic, Phenotype, Pigmentation, Sex Factors, X Chromosome, Mutagenesis, Transgenes, DNA Methylation, Gene Silencing, Epigenesis, Genetic, Green Fluorescent Proteins, Mice

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