Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26136447›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2015

When is incomplete epigenetic resetting in germ cells favoured by natural selection?

Tobias Uller, Sinead English, Ido Pen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

38 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Reversibility of sex changes in the plant kingdom: more important than we thought?Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A natural bacterial pathogen ofbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. How is epigenetics predicted to contribute to climate change adaptation? What evidence do we need?Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Article
  17. Evolution of epigenetic transmission when selection acts on fecundity versus viability.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Article
  18. 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

3 authors.

Tobias Uller
Sinead English
Ido Pen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Resetting of epigenetic marks, such as DNA methylation, in germ cells or early embryos is not always complete. Epigenetic states may therefore persist, decay or accumulate across generations. In spite of mounting empirical evidence for incomplete resetting, it is currently poorly understood whether it simply reflects stochastic noise or plays an adaptive role in phenotype determination. Here, we use a simple model to show that incomplete resetting can be adaptive in heterogeneous environments. Transmission of acquired epigenetic states prevents mismatched phenotypes when the environment changes infrequently relative to generation time and when maternal and environmental cues are unreliable. We discuss how these results may help to interpret the emerging data on transgenerational epigenetic inheritance in plants and animals.

Indexed as

Epigenesis, GeneticSelection, GeneticAnimalsGerm CellsGerm Cells, PlantHeredityModels, BiologicalPlant Development

Identifiers

PMID26136447
PMCPMC4528548

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.