ArticleGenetics2008
Reciprocally imprinted genes and the response to selection on one sex.
Article in Genetics, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sexual conflict, heterochrony and tissue specificity as evolutionary problems of adaptive plasticity in development.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Review
- Sexually antagonistic selection promotes genetic divergence between males and females in an ant.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019Article
- Evolutionary Quantitative Genetics of Genomic Imprinting.Genetics · 2019Article
- Sex Differences in Neurotoxicogenetics.Frontiers in genetics · 2018Review
- The scope and strength of sex-specific selection in genome evolution.Journal of evolutionary biology · 2013Article
- Two sexes, one genome: the evolutionary dynamics of intralocus sexual conflict.Ecology and evolution · 2013Article
- Human sexual conflict from molecules to culture.Evolutionary psychology : an international journal of evolutionary approaches to psychology and behavior · 2011Article
- DNA sequence polymorphisms in a panel of eight candidate bovine imprinted genes and their association with performance traits in Irish Holstein-Friesian cattle.BMC genetics · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We explore the theoretical consequences of limiting selection to males for the evolution of imprinted genes. We find that the efficiency of male-limited selection depends on the pattern of imprinting at an imprinted locus. When selection is strong, the maternally expressed pattern of imprinting allows faster genetic change than the reciprocal, paternally expressed pattern. When selection is relatively weak, the pattern of imprinting that permits a greater rate of genetic response to selection depends on the frequency of the favored allele: the paternally expressed pattern permits faster genetic change than does the maternally expressed pattern at low frequencies of a favored allele; at higher frequencies of a favored allele, however, the maternally expressed pattern is again more conducive to a genetic response. To our knowledge, this is the first theoretical description of a difference between the two reciprocal patterns of imprinting. The selective efficiency bias we identify between the two patterns of imprinting has implications for natural and livestock populations, which we discuss.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.