Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22899817›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2012

Convergent and divergent evolution of genomic imprinting in the marsupial Monodelphis domestica.

Radhika Das, Nathan Anderson, Maryellen I Koran, Jennifer R Weidman, Tarjei S Mikkelsen, Michael Kamal, Susan K Murphy, Kerstin Linblad-Toh, John M Greally, Randy L Jirtle

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. GigaByte (Hong Kong, China) · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Roles of retrovirus-derivedFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2023
    Review
  8. International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Radhika DasDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Box 3433, Durham, NC 27710, USA.
Nathan Anderson
Maryellen I Koran
Jennifer R Weidman
Tarjei S Mikkelsen
Michael Kamal
Susan K Murphy
Kerstin Linblad-Toh
John M Greally
Randy L Jirtle
Duke Medical Center · USBroad Institute · USAlbert Einstein College of Medicine · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · USUppsala University · SE

Funding

Obesity and deregulation of imprinted genes in early lifeR01DK085173 · NIDDK · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI HOYO, CATHRINE, MURPHY, SUSAN KAY · 2010 to 2013
$2.3M
TUMOR SUPPRESSOR FUNCTION OF THE M6P/IGF2 RECEPTORR01ES008823 · NIEHS · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI JIRTLE, RANDY L · 1997 to 2007
$2.2M
NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK085173NIDDK NIH HHS R01DK085173NIEHS NIH HHS R01ES008823
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGenomic imprinting is an epigenetic phenomenon resulting in parent-of-origin specific monoallelic gene expression. It is postulated to have evolved in placental mammals to modulate intrauterine resource allocation to the offspring. In this study, we determined the imprint status of metatherian orthologues of eutherian imprinted genes.

resultsL3MBTL and HTR2A were shown to be imprinted in Monodelphis domestica (the gray short-tailed opossum). MEST expressed a monoallelic and a biallelic transcript, as in eutherians. In contrast, IMPACT, COPG2, and PLAGL1 were not imprinted in the opossum. Differentially methylated regions (DMRs) involved in regulating imprinting in eutherians were not found at any of the new imprinted loci in the opossum. Interestingly, a novel DMR was identified in intron 11 of the imprinted IGF2R gene, but this was not conserved in eutherians. The promoter regions of the imprinted genes in the opossum were enriched for the activating histone modification H3 Lysine 4 dimethylation.

conclusionsThe phenomenon of genomic imprinting is conserved in Therians, but the marked difference in the number and location of imprinted genes and DMRs between metatherians and eutherians indicates that imprinting is not fully conserved between the two Therian infra-classes. The identification of a novel DMR at a non-conserved location as well as the first demonstration of histone modifications at imprinted loci in the opossum suggest that genomic imprinting may have evolved in a common ancestor of these two Therian infra-classes with subsequent divergence of regulatory mechanisms in the two lineages.

Indexed as

GenomeGenomic ImprintingAllelesAnimalsBiological EvolutionCpG IslandsDNA MethylationHistonesHumansIntronsMiceMonodelphisPromoter Regions, GeneticHistones

Identifiers

PMID22899817
PMCPMC3507640
OpenAlexW2128623333

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.