CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 39Genetic Syndromes and ImprintingGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals

Genomic imprinting effects on complex traits: A phenotype-based perspective

Open access
Wolf, Jason B., Hager, Reinmar, Cheverud, James M.·2008·Epigenetics
DOI 10.4161/epi.3.6.7257
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Parent-of-origin dependent gene expression associated with genomic imprinting is expected to result in the phenotypic signature of a difference between the average phenotypes of the reciprocal heterozygotes. Quantitative genetic mapping approaches have exploited this phenotypic manifestation to identify putatively imprinted loci affecting the expression of 'complex' traits. By focusing on the phenotypic consequences of imprinting, quantitative mapping techniques enable us to rapidly scan the genome for imprinted loci. Such genome-wide scans can be used to identify the array of pleiotropic effects of imprinted loci and to establish associated imprinting patterns including partial imprinting and more complex imprinting patterns, such as polar overdominance. Moreover, quantitative mapping makes no assumptions about underlying mechanisms of parent-of-origin-dependent effects and can thus help identifying alternative mechanisms causing imprinted expression. Thus, we suggest that phenotype-based mapping approaches can significantly advance our understanding of various aspects of genomic imprinting, especially when integrated with other molecular or bioinformatic approaches.

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 · 10.4161/epi.3.6.7257

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.

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 37

  1. [1]1. Spencer HG. Effects of genomic imprinting on quantitative traits. Genetica 2008; In Press.
  2. [2]2. Day T, Bonduriansky R. Intralocus sexual conflict can drive the evolution of genomic imprinting. Genetics 2004; 167:1537-46.
  3. [3]3. Haig D. Parental antagonism, relatedness asymmetries and genomic imprinting. Proc R Soc B 1997; 264:1657-61.
  4. [4]4. Wilkins JF, Haig D. What good is genomic imprinting: The function of parent-specific gene expression. Nature Gen Rev 2003; 4:1-19.
  5. [5]5. Spencer HG, Clark AG, Feldman MW. Genetic conflicts and the evolutionary origin of genomic imprinting. Trends Ecol Evol 1999; 14:197-201.
  6. [6]6. Wolf JB, Hager R. A maternal-offspring coadaptation theory for the evolution of genomic imprinting. PLoS Biology 2006; 4:380.
  7. [7]7. Haley CS, Knott SA. A simple method for mapping quantitative trait loci in line crosses using flanking markers. Heredity 1992; 69:315-24.
  8. [8]8. Lander ES, Botstein D. Mapping Mendelian factors underlying quantitative traits using RFLP linkage maps. Genetics 1989; 121:185-99.
  9. [9]9. Cheverud JM, Hager R, Fawcett G, Wang B, Wolf JB. Genomic imprinting effects on adult body composition in mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008; 105:4253-8.
  10. [10]10. Mantey C, Brockmann GA, Kalm E, Reinsch N. Mapping and exclusion mapping of genomic imprinting effects in mouse F 2 families. J Hered 2005; 96:329-38.
  11. [11]11. Knott SA, Marklund L, Haley CS, Andersson K, Davies W, Ellegren H, et al. Multiple marker mapping of quantitative trait loci in a cross between outbred wild boar and large white pigs. Genetics 1998; 149:1069-80.
  12. [12]12. Nezer C, Moreau L, Brouwers B, Coppieters W, Detilleaux J, Hanset R, et al. An imprinted QTL with a major effect on muscle mass and fat deposition maps to the IGF2 locus in pigs. Nature Genet 1999; 21:155-6.
  13. [13]13. Van Laere1 A-S, Nguyen M, Braunschweig M, Nezer C, Collette C, Moreau L, et al. A regulatory mutation in IGF2 causes a major QTL effect on muscle growth in the pig. Nature 2003; 425:832-6.
  14. [14]14. Cui Y, Cheverud JM, Wu R. A statistical model for dissecting genomic imprinting through genetic mapping. Genetica 2007; 130:227-39.
  15. [15]15. Li J, Jiang T. Efficient rule-based haplotyping algorithms for pedigree data. Proc Recomb 2003; 3:197-206.
  16. [17]17. Hager R, Cheverud JM, Wolf JB. Maternal effects as the cause of parent-of-origin effects that mimic genomic imprinting. Genetics 2008; 178:1755-62. References
  17. [18]18. Feil R, Berger F. Convergent evolution of genomic imprinting in plants and mammals. Trends Genet 2007; 23:192-9.
  18. [19]19. Goldberg AD, Allis CD, Bernstein E. Epigenetics: a landscape takes shape. Cell 2007; 128:635-8.
  19. [20]20. Krueger C, Morison IM. Random expression: making a choice. Trends Genet 2008; 24:257-9.
  20. [21]21. Reik W, Walter J. Genomic imprinting: parental influence on the genome. Nature Rev 2001; 2:21-32.
  21. [22]22. Wagschal A, Feil R. Genomic imprinting in the placenta. Cytogen Genome Res 2006; 113:90-8.
  22. [24]24. Mager J, Bartolomei MS. Strategies for dissecting epigenetic mechanisms in the mouse. Nat Genet 2005; 37:1194-200.
  23. [26]26. Luedi PP, Hartemink AJ, Jirtle RL. Genome-wide prediction of imprinted murine genes. Genome Res 2005; 15:875-84.
  24. [27]27. Luedi PP, Dietrich FS, Weidman JR, Bosko JM, Jirtle RL, Hartemink AJ. Computational and experimental identification of novel human imprinted genes. Genome Res 2007; 17:1723-30.
  25. [28]28. Nikaido I, Saito C, Mizuno Y, Meguro M, Bono H, Kadomura M, et al. Discovery of imprinted transcripts in the mouse transcriptome using large-scale expression profiling. Genome Res 2003; 13:1402-9.
  26. [29]29. de Koning DJ, Rattniek AP, Harlizius B, Arendonk JAM, Brascamp EW, Groenen MAM. Genome-wide scan for body composition in pigs reveals important role of imprinting. Proc Natl Acad Sci, USA 2000; 97:7947-50.
  27. [30]30. Wolf JB, Cheverud JM, Roseman C, Hager R. Genome-wide analysis reveals a complex pattern of genomic imprinting in mice. PLoS Genetics 2008; 4:1000091.
  28. [31]31. Cattanach BM, Beechey CV. Genomic imprinting in the mouse: possible final analysis. In: Reik W, Surani A, eds. Genomic Imprinting. New York, NY: Oxford University Press 1997; 118-45.
  29. [32]32. Spencer HG. The correlation between relatives on the supposition of genomic imprinting. Genetics 2002; 161:411-7.
  30. [33]33. de Koning DJ, Bovenhuis H, van Arendonk JAM. On the detection of imprinted quantita- tive trait loci in experimental crosses of outbred species. Genetics 2002; 161:931-8.
  31. [34]34. Falconer DS, Mackay TFC. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. London: Prentice Hall 1996.
  32. [35]35. Leamy LJ, Klingenberg CP, Sherratt E, Wolf JB, Cheverud JM. A search for quantitative trait loci exhibiting imprinting effects on mouse mandible size and shape. Heredity 2008; 101:518-26
  33. [36]36. Hager R, Cheverud JM, Leamy LG, Wolf JB. Sex-dependent imprinting effects on complex traits in mice. BMC Evol Biol: 2008; 8:303.
  34. [37]37. Cockett NF, Jackson SP, Shay TL, Farnir F, Berghmans S, Snowder GD, et al. Polar over- dominance at the ovine callipyge locus. Science 1996; 273:236-8.
  35. [38]38. Georges MC, Charlier C, Cockett NE. The callipyge locus: evidence for trans interaction of reciprocally imprinted genes. Trends Genet 2003; 19:248-52.
  36. [40]40. Haig D, Graham C. Genomic imprinting and the strange case of the insulin-like growth factor II receptor. Cell 1991; 64:1045-6.
  37. [41]41. Vrana PB, Guan XJ, Ingram RS, Tilghman SM. Genomic imprinting is disrupted in inter- specific Peromyscus hybrids. Nature Genet 1998; 20:362-5. www.landesbioscience.com Epigenetics

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Wolf, J. B., Hager, R., & Cheverud, J. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
ORCID
Venue
Epigenetics
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2008-11
Volume
3
Issue
6
Pages
295-299
ISSN
  • 1559-2294 (ISSN-L)
  • 1559-2308
DOI
10.4161/epi.3.6.7257
OpenAlex
W2030432812
Cited by
39
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Epigenetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Directorate for Biological Sciences
  • Natural Environment Research Council
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (DK 055736, R01DK055736)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Syndromes and Imprinting
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Keywords
genomic imprinting, complex traits, parent-of-origin gene expression, imprinted loci, pleiotropy
MeSH terms
Animals, Biological Evolution, Humans, Phenotype, Genomic Imprinting, Quantitative Trait, Heritable, Quantitative Trait Loci

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