The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Gene Regulatory Networks Generating the Phenomena of Additivity, Dominance and Epistasis
Abstract
We show how the phenomena of genetic dominance, overdominance, additivity, and epistasis are generic features of simple diploid gene regulatory networks. These regulatory network models are together sufficiently complex to catch most of the suggested molecular mechanisms responsible for generating dominant mutations. These include reduced gene dosage, expression or protein activity (haploinsufficiency), increased gene dosage, ectopic or temporarily altered mRNA expression, increased or constitutive protein activity, and dominant negative effects. As classical genetics regards the phenomenon of dominance to be generated by intralocus interactions, we have studied two one-locus models, one with a negative autoregulatory feedback loop, and one with a positive autoregulatory feedback loop. To include the phenomena of epistasis and downstream regulatory effects, a model of a three-locus signal transduction network is also analyzed. It is found that genetic dominance as well as overdominance may be an intra- as well as interlocus interaction phenomenon. In the latter case the dominance phenomenon is intimately connected to either feedback-mediated epistasis or downstream-mediated epistasis. It appears that in the intra- as well as the interlocus case there is considerable room for additive gene action, which may explain to some degree the predictive power of quantitative genetic theory, with its emphasis on this type of gene action. Furthermore, the results illuminate and reconcile the prevailing explanations of heterosis, and they support the old conjecture that the phenomenon of dominance may have an evolutionary explanation related to life history strategy.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Protein modules and signalling networks
Pawson, T. (1995) · Nature · doi:10.1038/373573a0 · Cited by 2,420
The limits of selection during maize domestication
Wang, R.-L., Stec, A., Hey, J., Lukens, L., & Doebley, J. (1999) · Nature · doi:10.1038/18435 · Cited by 740
THE EFFECT OF LINKAGE ON DIRECTIONAL SELECTION
Felsenstein, J. (1965) · Genetics · doi:10.1093/genetics/52.2.349 · Cited by 188
Cited by
Epistasis: too often neglected in complex trait studies?
Carlborg, Ö., & Haley, C. S. (2004) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg1407 · Cited by 934
The Evolution of Genetic Architecture
Hansen, T. F. (2006) · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.37.091305.110224 · Cited by 425
Holland, J. B. (2001) · Plant Breeding Reviews · doi:10.1002/9780470650196.ch2 · Cited by 147
The genetic landscape of a physical interaction
Diss, G., & Lehner, B. (2018) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.32472 · Cited by 140
Metadata
- Authors
- Omholt, S. W., Plahte, E., Øyehaug, L., & Xiang, K.
- Venue
- Genetics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2000-06-01
- Volume
- 155
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 969-980
- ISSN
- 0016-6731 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-2631
- OpenAlex
- W2121186771
- Cited by
- 162
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 2.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Gene Regulatory Networks Generating the Phenomena of Additivity, Dominance and Epistasis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/genetics/155.2.969
- The paper
- Omholt, S. W., Plahte, E., Øyehaug, L., & Xiang, K. (2000). Gene Regulatory Networks Generating the Phenomena of Additivity, Dominance and Epistasis. Genetics. https://doi.org/10.1093/genetics/155.2.969
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.