Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12871603›Full record

ArticleBMC evolutionary biology2003

Theory of genomic imprinting conflict in social insects.

David C Queller

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC evolutionary biology, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 111 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Genome Evolution in Social Insects.Genome biology and evolution · 2026
    Review
  2. Honey bee queen pheromone provides an early warning system to prevent collapsing colonies.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Parent-of-origin effects, allele-specific expression, genomic imprinting and paternal manipulation in social insects.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Sexual selection modulates genetic conflicts and patterns of genomic imprinting.Evolution; international journal of organic evolution · 2017
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

David C QuellerDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology MS-170, Rice University, P,O, Box 1892, Houston, TX 77005-1892, USA. queller@rice.edu
Rice University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGenomic imprinting refers to the differential expression of genes inherited from the mother and father (matrigenes and patrigenes). The kinship theory of genomic imprinting treats parent-specific gene expression as products of within-genome conflict. Specifically, matrigenes and patrigenes will be in conflict over treatment of relatives to which they are differently related. Haplodiploid females have many such relatives, and social insects have many contexts in which they affect relatives, so haplodiploid social insects are prime candidates for tests of the kinship theory of imprinting.

resultsMatrigenic and patrigenic relatednesses are derived for individuals affected in a variety of contexts, including queen competition, sex ratio, worker laying of male eggs and policing, colony fission, and adoption of new queens. Numerous predictions emerge for what contexts should elicit imprinting, which individuals and tissues will show it, and the direction of imprinting effects. The predictions often vary for different genetic structures (varying queen and mate number) and often contrast with predictions for diploids.

conclusionBecause the contexts differ from the normal imprinting case, and because nothing is currently known about imprinting in social insects, these predictions can serve as a strong a priori test of the kinship theory of imprinting. If the predictions are correct, then social insects, which have long served as exemplars of cooperation between individuals, will also be shown to be extraordinary examples of competition within individual genomes.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalModels, GeneticSocial BehaviorAnimalsAntsBeesDiploidyFemaleGene Expression RegulationGenomic ImprintingHaplotypesInsectaMaleSex RatioSexual Behavior, AnimalWasps

Identifiers

PMID12871603
PMCPMC194663
OpenAlexW2153681829

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.