Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15342496›Full record

ArticleGenetics2004

Intralocus sexual conflict can drive the evolution of genomic imprinting.

Troy Day, Russell Bonduriansky

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 89 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
89citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

89 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. On the resolution of sexual conflict over shared traits.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024
    Review
  10. Multivariate genetic architecture reveals testosterone-driven sexual antagonism in contemporary humans.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. The genetic architecture of sexual dimorphism in the mossProceedings. Biological sciences · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

29 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Troy DayDepartment of Mathematics, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada. tday@mast.queensu.ca
Russell Bonduriansky

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genomic imprinting is a phenomenon whereby the expression of an allele differs depending upon its parent of origin. There is an increasing number of examples of this form of epigenetic inheritance across a wide range of taxa, and imprinting errors have also been implicated in several human diseases. Various hypotheses have been put forward to explain the evolution of genomic imprinting, but there is not yet a widely accepted general hypothesis for the variety of imprinting patterns observed. Here a new evolutionary hypothesis, based on intralocus sexual conflict, is proposed. This hypothesis provides a potential explanation for much of the currently available empirical data, and it also makes new predictions about patterns of genomic imprinting that are expected to evolve but that have not, as of yet, been looked for in nature. This theory also provides a potential mechanism for the resolution of intralocus sexual conflict in sexually selected traits and a novel pathway for the evolution of sexual dimorphism.

Indexed as

Genomic ImprintingModels, GeneticAnimalsChromosome MappingConflict, PsychologicalFemaleHumansMaleMultifactorial InheritanceSexual Behavior

Identifiers

PMID15342496
PMCPMC1470977

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.