ArticleHeredity2014
Genomic imprinting and the units of adaptation.
Article in Heredity, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Brinkmanship in intragenomic conflict.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Kin selection of time travel: the social evolutionary causes and consequences of dormancy.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Intragroup and intragenomic conflict over chemical defense against predators.Ecology and evolution · 2018Article
- Inter-group cooperation in humans and other animals.Biology letters · 2017Review
- Sexual selection modulates genetic conflicts and patterns of genomic imprinting.Evolution; international journal of organic evolution · 2017Article
- Intrafamily and intragenomic conflicts in human warfare.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2017Article
- Genomic imprinting: theories and data.Heredity · 2014Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two guiding principles identify which biological entities are able to evolve adaptations. Williams' principle holds that, in order for an entity to evolve adaptations, there must be selection between such entities. Maynard Smith's principle holds that, in order for an entity to evolve adaptations, selection within such entities must be absent or negligible. However, although the kinship theory of genomic imprinting suggests that parent-of-origin-specific gene expression evolves as a consequence of natural selection acting between--rather than within--individuals, it evades adaptive interpretation at the individual level and is instead viewed as an outcome of an intragenomic conflict of interest between an individual's genes. Here, I formalize the idea that natural selection drives intragenomic conflicts of interest between genes originating from different parents. Specifically, I establish mathematical links between the dynamics of natural selection and the idea of the gene as an intentional, inclusive-fitness-maximizing agent, and I clarify the role that information about parent of origin plays in mediating conflicts of interest between genes residing in the same genome. These results highlight that the suppression of divisive information may be as important as the suppression of lower levels of selection in maintaining the integrity of units of adaptation.
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.