Literature DB >> 14616065

Natural selection and the evolution of genome imprinting.

Elena de la Casa-Esperón1, Carmen Sapienza.   

Abstract

Sexual reproduction results from the fusion of gametes in which the chromatin configuration of maternal and paternal chromosomes is distinct at fertilization. Although many of the differences are erased during successive cellular divisions and chromatin modifications, some are retained in both somatic and germline cells. These epigenetic modifications can confer different characteristics on maternal and paternal chromosomes and such differences can be selected during any process that has the ability to distinguish between homologues. The end result of these selective forces are parental origin effects, writ large. The range of effects observed, including transcriptional imprinting and effects on chromosome segregation and heterochromatization, reflects the diversity of selective forces in operation. However, a closer look at these effects suggests that parental origin-dependent differences in chromatin structure might be subject to some common forces and that these forces may explain many of the "nontranscriptional" parental origin effects observed in mammals.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14616065     DOI: 10.1146/annurev.genet.37.110801.143741

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Annu Rev Genet        ISSN: 0066-4197            Impact factor:   16.830


  16 in total

1.  Vernalization, competence, and the epigenetic memory of winter.

Authors:  Richard Amasino
Journal:  Plant Cell       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 11.277

2.  Nanos1 functions as a translational repressor in the Xenopus germline.

Authors:  Fangfang Lai; Yi Zhou; Xueting Luo; Josh Fox; Mary Lou King
Journal:  Mech Dev       Date:  2010-12-30       Impact factor: 1.882

3.  Aneuploidy and genetic variation in the Arabidopsis thaliana triploid response.

Authors:  Isabelle M Henry; Brian P Dilkes; Kim Young; Brian Watson; Helen Wu; Luca Comai
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2005-06-08       Impact factor: 4.562

4.  Imprinting capacity of gamete lineages in Caenorhabditis elegans.

Authors:  Ky Sha; Andrew Fire
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2005-06-08       Impact factor: 4.562

5.  Imprinting of the Y chromosome influences dosage compensation in roX1 roX2 Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  Debashish U Menon; Victoria H Meller
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2009-08-24       Impact factor: 4.562

6.  Epigenetic marks for chromosome imprinting during spermatogenesis in coccids.

Authors:  Silvia Bongiorni; Margherita Pugnali; Silvia Volpi; Davide Bizzaro; Prim B Singh; Giorgio Prantera
Journal:  Chromosoma       Date:  2009-05-22       Impact factor: 4.316

7.  Genomic imprinting in Drosophila has properties of both mammalian and insect imprinting.

Authors:  Matthew Anaka; Audra Lynn; Patrick McGinn; Vett K Lloyd
Journal:  Dev Genes Evol       Date:  2008-11-25       Impact factor: 0.900

Review 8.  Epigenetic factors and autism spectrum disorders.

Authors:  Bess M Flashner; Mark E Russo; Jenine E Boileau; Derek W Leong; G Ian Gallicano
Journal:  Neuromolecular Med       Date:  2013-03-07       Impact factor: 3.843

9.  Intronic parent-of-origin dependent differential methylation at the Actn1 gene is conserved in rodents but is not associated with imprinted expression.

Authors:  John D Calaway; José Ignacio Domínguez; Megan E Hanson; Ezequiel C Cambranis; Fernando Pardo-Manuel de Villena; Elena de la Casa-Esperon
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-11-08       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Evaluating the evidence for transmission distortion in human pedigrees.

Authors:  Wynn K Meyer; Barbara Arbeithuber; Carole Ober; Thomas Ebner; Irene Tiemann-Boege; Richard R Hudson; Molly Przeworski
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2012-02-29       Impact factor: 4.562

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.