Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32967714›Full record

ReviewEpigenetics & chromatin2020

The social construction of the social epigenome and the larger biological context.

Ute Deichmann

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Epigenetics & chromatin, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Professor Emma Whitelaw, a pioneer of epigenetic inheritance.Frontiers in epigenetics and epigenomics · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Epigenetics of Trauma Transmission and Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder: What Does the Evidence Support?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Review
  6. Perinatal S-Adenosylmethionine Supplementation RepressesInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  7. Walk on the wild side: a response to Zaina.Epigenetics communications · 2023
    Article
  8. Review
  9. What Is Lost in the Weismann Barrier?Journal of developmental biology · 2020
    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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ute DeichmannJacques Loeb Centre for the History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, P.O. Box 653, Beer Sheva, 8410500, Israel. uted@post.bgu.ac.il.ORCID 0000-0003-0990-2337
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epigenetics researchers in developmental, cell, and molecular biology greatly diverge in their understanding and definitions of epigenetics. In contrast, social epigeneticists, e.g., sociologists, scholars of STS, and behavioural scientists, share a focus and definition of epigenetics that is environmentally caused and trans-generationally inherited. This article demonstrates that this emphasis on the environment and on so-called Lamarckian inheritance, in addition to other factors, reflects an interdisciplinary power struggle with genetics, in which epigenetics appears to grant the social sciences a higher epistemic status. Social scientists' understanding of epigenetics, thus, appears in part to be socially constructed, i.e., the result of extra-scientific factors, such as social processes and the self-interest of the discipline. This article argues that social epigeneticists make far-reaching claims by selecting elements from research labelled epigenetics in biology while ignoring widely confirmed scientific facts in genetics and cell biology, such as the dependence of epigenetic marks on DNA sequence-specific events, or the lack of evidence for the lasting influence of the environment on epigenetic marks or the epigenome. Moreover, they treat as a given crucial questions that are far from resolved, such as what role, if any, DNA methylation plays in the complex biochemical system of regulating gene activity. The article also points out incorrect perceptions and media hypes among biological epigeneticists and calls attention to an apparent bias among scientific journals that prefer papers that promote transgenerational epigenetic inheritance over articles that critique it. The article concludes that while research labelled epigenetics contributes significantly to our knowledge about chromatin and the genome, it does not, as is often claimed, rehabilitate Lamarck or overthrow the fundamental biological principles of gene regulation, which are based on specific regulatory sequences of the genome.

Indexed as

EpigenomeGene-Environment InteractionSocial EnvironmentAnimalsEpigenomicsHumansCellular memoryCytosine methylation as genomic defense systemEnvironmental epigeneticsSocial epigeneticsTranscription factorsTransgenerational epigenetic inheritance

Identifiers

PMID32967714
PMCPMC7510271
OpenAlexW3088634583

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.