Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18752349›Full record

ArticlePLoS biology2008

Evolution of genomic imprinting with biparental care: implications for Prader-Willi and Angelman syndromes.

Francisco Ubeda

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS biology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Behavioural ecology in the twenty-first century.Nature ecology & evolution · 2025
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Origins of music in credible signaling.The Behavioral and brain sciences · 2020
    Article
  9. Response to vocal music in Angelman syndrome contrasts with Prader-Willi syndrome.Evolution and human behavior : official journal of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society · 2019
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. First principles of Hamiltonian medicine.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2014
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Evolution of genomic imprinting as a coordinator of coadapted gene expression.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2013
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Genomic imprinting and the evolutionary psychology of human kinship.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2011
    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.

Francisco UbedaDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, United States of America. fubeda@utk.edu
University of Tennessee at Knoxville · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The term "imprinted gene" refers to genes whose expression is conditioned by their parental origin. Among theories to unravel the evolution of genomic imprinting, the kinship theory prevails as the most widely accepted, because it sheds light on many aspects of the biology of imprinted genes. While most assumptions underlying this theory have not escaped scrutiny, one remains overlooked: mothers are the only source of parental investment in mammals. But, is it reasonable to assume that fathers' contribution of resources is negligible? It is not in some key mammalian orders including humans. In this research, I generalize the kinship theory of genomic imprinting beyond maternal contribution only. In addition to deriving new conditions for the evolution of imprinting, I have found that the same gene may show the opposite pattern of expression when the investment of one parent relative to the investment of the other changes; the reversion, interestingly, does not require that fathers contribute more resources than mothers. This exciting outcome underscores the intimate connection between the kinship theory and the social structure of the organism considered. Finally, the insight gained from my model enabled me to explain the clinical phenotype of Prader-Willi syndrome. This syndrome is caused by the paternal inheritance of a deletion of the PWS/AS cluster of imprinted genes in human Chromosome 15. As such, children suffering from this syndrome exhibit a striking biphasic phenotype characterized by poor sucking and reduced weight before weaning but by voracious appetite and obesity after weaning. Interest in providing an evolutionary explanation to such phenotype is 2-fold. On the one hand, the kinship theory has been doubted as being able to explain the symptoms of patients with Prader-Willi. On the other hand, the post-weaning symptoms remain as one of the primary concern of pediatricians treating children with Prader-Willi. In this research, I reconcile the clinical phenotype of Prader-Willi syndrome with the kinship theory, contending that paternal investment relative to maternal investment increases after weaning. I also propose a genetic composition of the PWS/AS cluster, discuss the effects of new types of mutations, and contemplate the potential side effects of reactivating silent genes for medical purposes.

Indexed as

Genomic ImprintingModels, GeneticAngelman SyndromeBiological EvolutionChildChromosomes, Human, Pair 15HumansObesityPrader-Willi SyndromeWeaning

Identifiers

PMID18752349
PMCPMC2525684
OpenAlexW2037700716

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.