ArticleThe American naturalist2010
Matrisibs, patrisibs, and the evolution of imprinting on autosomes and sex chromosomes.
Article in The American naturalist, 2010. 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.
- Mom genes and dad genes: genomic imprinting in the regulation of social behaviors.Epigenomics · 2025Review
- Genetic conflicts and the case for licensed anthropomorphizing.Behavioral ecology and sociobiology · 2022Review
- Coadaptation and conflict, misconception and muddle, in the evolution of genomic imprinting.Heredity · 2014Review
- Specialists and generalists: the sexual ecology of the genome.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology · 2014Review
- Sex-differential selection and the evolution of X inactivation strategies.PLoS genetics · 2013Article
- Evolution of genomic imprinting as a coordinator of coadapted gene expression.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2013Article
- Polyandry and sex-specific gene expression.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2013Review
- Genomic imprinting and the evolutionary psychology of human kinship.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
The conflict theory of genomic imprinting argues that parent-of-origin effects on allelic expression evolve as a consequence of conflict between maternally and paternally derived genomes. I derive explicit population-genetic models of this theory when individuals in a cohort with an arbitrary and variable number of sires and dams interact. I show that the evolution of imprinting is governed by the reciprocal of the harmonic mean number of fathers but the reciprocal of the arithmetic mean number of mothers per cohort. Thus, a few monandrous females in a polyandrous population decrease the strength of the genetic conflict and the opportunity for conflict-driven paternal imprinting. In contrast, in populations in which few males control large harems, rare males with small harems do not have such a disproportionate effect on genetic conflicts and maternal imprinting. Additionally, I demonstrate that under the conflict theory, selection for imprinted expression on paternally derived X chromosomes is much weaker than it is on maternally derived X chromosomes or autosomes.
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.