Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36916665›Full record

SynthesiseLife2023

Reassessment of weak parent-of-origin expression bias shows it rarely exists outside of known imprinted regions.

Carol A Edwards, William M D Watkinson, Stephanie B Telerman, Lisa C Hulsmann, Russell S Hamilton, Anne C Ferguson-Smith

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in eLife, 2023. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Species-Specific Parent-Of-Origin Expression of Adam23 in the Mammalian Brain.Genes to cells : devoted to molecular & cellular mechanisms · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Livestock species as emerging models for genomic imprinting.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2024
    Review
  15. Epigenetic control and genomic imprinting dynamics of the Dlk1-Dio3 domain.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2023
    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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Carol A EdwardsDepartment of Genetics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1887-1280
William M D WatkinsonDepartment of Genetics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Stephanie B TelermanDepartment of Genetics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Lisa C HulsmannDepartment of Genetics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Russell S HamiltonDepartment of Genetics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0598-3793
Anne C Ferguson-SmithDepartment of Genetics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7608-5894
University of Cambridge · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/R009791/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In mouse and human, genes subjected to genomic imprinting have been shown to function in development, behavior, and post-natal adaptations. Failure to correctly imprint genes in human is associated with developmental syndromes, adaptive, and metabolic disorders during life as well as numerous forms of cancer. In recent years researchers have turned to RNA-seq technologies applied to reciprocal hybrid strains of mice to identify novel imprinted genes, causing a threefold increase in genes reported as having a parental origin-specific expression bias. The functional relevance of parental origin-specific expression bias is not fully appreciated especially since many are reported with only minimal parental bias (e.g. 51:49). Here, we present an in-depth meta-analysis of previously generated RNA-seq data and show that the methods used to generate and analyze libraries greatly influence the calling of allele-specific expression. Validation experiments show that most novel genes called with parental-origin-specific allelic bias are artefactual, with the mouse strain contributing a larger effect on expression biases than parental origin. Of the weak novel genes that do validate, most are located at the periphery of known imprinted domains, suggesting they may be affected by local allele- and tissue-specific conformation. Together these findings highlight the need for robust tools, definitions, and validation of putative imprinted genes to provide meaningful information within imprinting databases and to understand the functional and mechanistic implications of the process.

Indexed as

Gene Expression ProfilingGenomic ImprintingAllelesAnimalsDNA MethylationGene ExpressionHumansMiceepigeneticsgene expressiongeneticsgenomicsimprintingmouse

Identifiers

PMID36916665
PMCPMC10097420
OpenAlexW4324129149

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.