Evidence mapPaperPMID 42036611Full record

ReviewAdvances in experimental medicine and biology2026

Environmental and Genetic Perturbations of the Sperm Epigenome.

Alberto de la Iglesia, Julie Cocquet

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Alberto de la IglesiaUniversité Paris Cité, INSERM, CNRS, Institut Cochin, Paris, France.
Julie CocquetUniversité Paris Cité, INSERM, CNRS, Institut Cochin, Paris, France. julie.cocquet@inserm.fr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The sperm cell is recognized nowadays as a key epigenetic vector, transmitting not only the paternal genome but also a complex epigenetic content-including DNA methylation, chromatin code and structure, and non-coding RNAs-to the zygote. This epigenome is highly sensitive to environmental factors, with paternal exposures such as dietary intake, lifestyle choices, stress, chemical hazards, pollution, or reprotoxic treatments (among others) influencing its programming. Genetic factors also modulate the sperm epigenetic cargo, supporting that a combination of complex multifactorial cues will define the final epigenome before conception. Alterations on the sperm epigenetic alterations, apart from having the potential to be used as a diagnostic tool in reproductive medicine, are central to the paradigm of Paternal Origins of Health and Disease (POHaD), linking sperm epigenetic alterations not only with fertility problems, but also with the transmission of altered traits to the zygote, potentially impacting embryo and placenta development during pregnancy, associated with a higher incidence of maternal and offspring long-term health problems.This chapter reviews recent evidence on how environmental and genetic perturbations modify the sperm epigenome, highlighting its plasticity and the challenges posed by the heterogeneity among studies. We discuss the interplay between exposome and genotype, and the need for further research to clarify the mechanisms of epigenetic inheritance and its long-term consequences.

Indexed as

Epigenesis, GeneticEpigenomeGene-Environment InteractionPaternal ExposureSpermatozoaAnimalsDevelopmental Origins of Health and DiseaseDNA MethylationEnvironmental ExposureEpigenetic MemoryHumansMaleEpigenetic inheritanceEpigeneticsGene-environment (GxE) interactionPaternal transmissionPOHaDSpermatozoa

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.