Retrotransposon Silencing by DNA Methylation Can Drive Mammalian Genomic Imprinting
Open accessAbstract
Among mammals, only eutherians and marsupials are viviparous and have genomic imprinting that leads to parent-of-origin-specific differential gene expression. We used comparative analysis to investigate the origin of genomic imprinting in mammals. PEG10 (paternally expressed 10) is a retrotransposon-derived imprinted gene that has an essential role for the formation of the placenta of the mouse. Here, we show that an orthologue of PEG10 exists in another therian mammal, the marsupial tammar wallaby (Macropus eugenii), but not in a prototherian mammal, the egg-laying platypus (Ornithorhynchus anatinus), suggesting its close relationship to the origin of placentation in therian mammals. We have discovered a hitherto missing link of the imprinting mechanism between eutherians and marsupials because tammar PEG10 is the first example of a differentially methylated region (DMR) associated with genomic imprinting in marsupials. Surprisingly, the marsupial DMR was strictly limited to the 5' region of PEG10, unlike the eutherian DMR, which covers the promoter regions of both PEG10 and the adjacent imprinted gene SGCE. These results not only demonstrate a common origin of the DMR-associated imprinting mechanism in therian mammals but provide the first demonstration that DMR-associated genomic imprinting in eutherians can originate from the repression of exogenous DNA sequences and/or retrotransposons by DNA methylation.
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
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.
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?
In vertebrates, imprinting seems to have evolved recently and has only been confirmed in marsupials and eutherian mammals.
“In the vertebrates, imprinting seems to have evolved recently and has only been confirmed in marsupials and eutherian mammals 61,62”
From Genome analysis of the platypus reveals unique signatures of evolution (2008) · cites this paper as [62]
The Introduction (page unavailable) says genomic imprinting has been observed in eutherian and marsupial mammals, but not in monotremes; the Author Summary places the studied imprinting mechanism's origin in a therian ancestor. The paper does not establish that imprinting has been confirmed nowhere else among vertebrates, and its evolutionary finding concerns a particular imprinting mechanism rather than the origin of all imprinting. (LLM, conf=0.78)
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.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 34 · Cited by 209
- Authors
- Suzuki, S., Ono, R., Narita, T., Pask, A. J., Shaw, G., Wang, C., Kohda, T., Alsop, A. E., Marshall Graves, J. A., Kohara, Y., Ishino, F., Renfree, M. B., & Kaneko-Ishino, T.
- Affiliations
- Tokyo Medical and Dental University (JP)
- National Institute of Genetics (JP)
- The University of Melbourne (AU)
- Australian National University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Ishino, Fumitoshi
- Renfree, Marilyn B
- ORCID
- Venue
- PLoS Genetics
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2007-04-13
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- e55
- ISSN
- 1553-7390 (ISSN-L)
- 1553-7404
- PMC
- PMC1851980
- OpenAlex
- W2061441723
- Cited by
- 209
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 26
- FWCI
- 10.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- PLoS Genetics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Clemson University
- Asahi Glass Foundation
- Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
- Mitsubishi Foundation
- Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Syndromes and Imprinting
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Chromosomal and Genetic Variations
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Epigenetics and DNA Methylation
- Keywords
- genomic imprinting, retrotransposon silencing, DNA methylation, PEG10, differentially methylated regions, tammar wallaby, marsupials, placental mammals, placental evolution, SGCE, parent-of-origin gene expression, platypus
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Chromosome Mapping, DNA-Binding Proteins, Embryo, Mammalian, Humans, Macropodidae, Models, Biological, Molecular Sequence Data, Phylogeny, Platypus, Proteins, RNA-Binding Proteins, Genomic Imprinting, Retroelements, DNA Methylation, Gene Silencing, Chromosomes, Mammalian, Apoptosis Regulatory 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