ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2019
Intragenomic conflict over bet-hedging.
Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- How Imprinted Genes Shape Nurturing Behaviours and Neural Circuits.Brain, behavior and evolution · 2026Review
- Brinkmanship in intragenomic conflict.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Comparative analysis reveals epigenomic evolution related to species traits and genomic imprinting in mammals.Innovation (Cambridge (Mass.)) · 2023Article
- The contribution of imprinted genes to neurodevelopmental and neuropsychiatric disorders.Translational psychiatry · 2022Review
- The imprinted lncRNAProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021Article
- Mice lacking paternal expression of imprinted Grb10 are risk-takers.Genes, brain, and behavior · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genomic imprinting, where an allele's expression pattern depends on its parental origin, is thought to result primarily from an intragenomic evolutionary conflict. Imprinted genes are widely expressed in the brain and have been linked to various phenotypes, including behaviours related to risk tolerance. In this paper, we analyse a model of evolutionary bet-hedging in a system with imprinted gene expression. Previous analyses of bet-hedging have shown that natural selection may favour alleles and traits that reduce reproductive variance, even at the expense of reducing mean reproductive success, with the trade-off between mean and variance depending on the population size. In species where the sexes have different reproductive variances, this bet-hedging trade-off differs between maternally and paternally inherited alleles. Where males have the higher reproductive variance, alleles are more strongly selected to reduce variance when paternally inherited than when maternally inherited. We connect this result to phenotypes connected with specific imprinted genes, including delay discounting and social dominance. The empirical patterns are consistent with paternally expressed imprinted genes promoting risk-averse behaviours that reduce reproductive variance. Conversely, maternally expressed imprinted genes promote risk-tolerant, variance-increasing behaviours. We indicate how future research might further test the hypotheses suggested by our analysis. This article is part of the theme issue 'Risk taking and impulsive behaviour: fundamental discoveries, theoretical perspectives and clinical implications'.
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.