The DOI matches its Crossref record; 203 of the 203 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Genomic Imprinting and Kinship: How Good is the Evidence?
Abstract
▪ Abstract The kinship theory of genomic imprinting proposes that parent-specific gene expression evolves at a locus because a gene's level of expression in one individual has fitness effects on other individuals who have different probabilities of carrying the maternal and paternal alleles of the individual in which the gene is expressed. Therefore, natural selection favors different levels of expression depending on an allele's sex-of-origin in the previous generation. This review considers the strength of evidence in support of this hypothesis for imprinted genes in four “clusters,” associated with the imprinted loci Igf2, Igf2r, callipyge, and Gnas. The clusters associated with Igf2 and Igf2r both contain paternally expressed transcripts that act as enhancers of prenatal growth and maternally expressed transcripts that act as inhibitors of prenatal growth. This is consistent with predictions of the kinship theory. However, the clusters also contain imprinted genes whose phenotypes as yet remain unexplained by the theory. The principal effects of imprinted genes in the callipyge and Gnas clusters appear to involve lipid and energy metabolism. The kinship theory predicts that maternally expressed transcripts will favor higher levels of nonshivering thermogenesis (NST) in brown adipose tissue (BAT) of animals that huddle for warmth as offspring. The phenotypes of reciprocal heterozygotes for Gnas knockouts provide provisional support for this hypothesis, as does some evidence from other imprinted genes (albeit more tentatively). The diverse effects of imprinted genes on the development of white adipose tissue (WAT) have so far defied a unifying hypothesis in terms of the kinship theory.
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
Parental Investment and Sexual Selection
(2017) · Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man · doi:10.4324/9781315129266-7 · Cited by 9,510
Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man: The Darwinian Pivot
(2017) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315129266 · Cited by 7,252
Brown Adipose Tissue: Function and Physiological Significance
CANNON, B., & NEDERGAARD, J. (2004) · Physiological Reviews · doi:10.1152/physrev.00015.2003 · Cited by 6,433
TRIVERS, R. L. (1974) · American Zoologist · doi:10.1093/icb/14.1.249 · Cited by 4,172
Bianco, A. C., Salvatore, D., Gereben, B., Berry, M. J., & Larsen, P. R. (2002) · Endocrine Reviews · doi:10.1210/edrv.23.1.0455 · Cited by 1,853
Parental imprinting of the mouse insulin-like growth factor II gene
DeChiara, T. M., Robertson, E. J., & Efstratiadis, A. (1991) · Cell · doi:10.1016/0092-8674(91)90513-x · Cited by 1,783
Positional cloning of a novel potassium channel gene: KVLQT1 mutations cause cardiac arrhythmias
Wang, Q., Curran, M. E., Splawski, I., Burn, T. C., Millholland, J. M., VanRaay, T. J., Shen, J., Timothy, K. W., Vincent, G. M., de Jager, T., et al. (1996) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng0196-17 · Cited by 1,759
Parental imprinting of the mouse H19 gene
Bartolomei, M. S., Zemel, S., & Tilghman, S. M. (1991) · Nature · doi:10.1038/351153a0 · Cited by 1,224
Mannose 6-phosphate receptors: new twists in the tale
Ghosh, P., Dahms, N. M., & Kornfeld, S. (2003) · Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology · doi:10.1038/nrm1050 · Cited by 1,086
The non-coding Air RNA is required for silencing autosomal imprinted genes
Sleutels, F., Zwart, R., & Barlow, D. P. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/415810a · Cited by 1,067
Cited by
High-Resolution Analysis of Parent-of-Origin Allelic Expression in the Mouse Brain
Gregg, C., Zhang, J., Weissbourd, B., Luo, S., Schroth, G. P., Haig, D., & Dulac, C. (2010) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1190830 · Cited by 591
Self-citationConstância, M., Angiolini, E., Sandovici, I., Smith, P., Smith, R., Kelsey, G., Dean, W., Ferguson-Smith, A., Sibley, C. P., Reik, W., et al. (2005) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0504468103 · Cited by 323
Constância, M., Kelsey, G., & Reik, W. (2004) · Nature · doi:10.1038/432053a · Cited by 242
Regulation of Placental Efficiency for Nutrient Transport by Imprinted Genes
Angiolini, E., Fowden, A., Coan, P., Sandovici, I., Smith, P., Dean, W., Burton, G., Tycko, B., Reik, W., Sibley, C., et al. (2006) · Placenta · doi:10.1016/j.placenta.2005.12.008 · Cited by 179
Van de Pette, M., Abbas, A., Feytout, A., McNamara, G., Bruno, L., To, W. K., Dimond, A., Sardini, A., Webster, Z., McGinty, J., et al. (2017) · Cell Reports · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2017.01.010 · Cited by 55
Metadata
- Authors
- Haig, D.
- Venue
- Annual Review of Genetics
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 2004-12-01
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 553-585
- ISSN
- 0066-4197 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-2948
- OpenAlex
- W2103660565
- Cited by
- 355
- References
- 203
- FWCI
- 1.89
- 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: Genomic Imprinting and Kinship: How Good is the Evidence? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1146/annurev.genet.37.110801.142741
- The paper
- Haig, D. (2004). Genomic Imprinting and Kinship: How Good is the Evidence? Annual Review of Genetics. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.genet.37.110801.142741
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.