ReviewGenetics2017
Do Gametes Woo? Evidence for Their Nonrandom Union at Fertilization.
Review in Genetics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and critical analysis of the evidence for transmission ratio distortion in humans.Genetics · 2026Pooled it
- The loop-tail mouse model displays open and closed caudal neural tube defects.Disease models & mechanisms · 2023Article
- Unravelling transmission ratio distortion across the bovine genome: identification of candidate regions for reproduction defects.BMC genomics · 2023Article
- Reproductive genomics of the mouse: implications for human fertility and infertility.Development (Cambridge, England) · 2023Article
- Unravelling the genetics of non-random fertilization associated with gametic incompatibility.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Transmission ratio distortion of mutations in the master regulator of centriole biogenesis PLK4.Human genetics · 2022Article
- Cryptic female choice within individual males - A neglected component of the postmating sexual selection?Journal of evolutionary biology · 2022Review
- Genetically-biased fertilization in APOBEC1 complementation factor (A1cf) mutant mice.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Impact of nonrandom selection mechanisms on the causal effect estimation for two-sample Mendelian randomization methods.PLoS genetics · 2022Article
- Breeding of CaScientific reports · 2021Article
- The Future of Women in Psychological Science.Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2021Article
- Suppression of Non-Random Fertilization by MHC Class I Antigens.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Article
- The virtuous cycle of human genetics and mouse models in drug discovery.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2019Review
- Article
- The Genetic Architecture of Intra-Species Hybrid Mito-Nuclear Epistasis.Frontiers in genetics · 2018Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
A fundamental tenet of inheritance in sexually reproducing organisms such as humans and laboratory mice is that gametes combine randomly at fertilization, thereby ensuring a balanced and statistically predictable representation of inherited variants in each generation. This principle is encapsulated in Mendel's First Law. But exceptions are known. With transmission ratio distortion, particular alleles are preferentially transmitted to offspring. Preferential transmission usually occurs in one sex but not both, and is not known to require interactions between gametes at fertilization. A reanalysis of our published work in mice and of data in other published reports revealed instances where any of 12 mutant genes biases fertilization, with either too many or too few heterozygotes and homozygotes, depending on the mutant gene and on dietary conditions. Although such deviations are usually attributed to embryonic lethality of the underrepresented genotypes, the evidence is more consistent with genetically-determined preferences for specific combinations of egg and sperm at fertilization that result in genotype bias without embryo loss. This unexpected discovery of genetically-biased fertilization could yield insights about the molecular and cellular interactions between sperm and egg at fertilization, with implications for our understanding of inheritance, reproduction, population genetics, and medical genetics.
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.