A Case‐by‐case Evolutionary Analysis of Four Imprinted Retrogenes

McCole, Ruth B.; Loughran, Noeleen B.; Chahal, Mandeep; Fernandes, Luis P.; Roberts, Roland G.; Fraternali, Franca; O’Connell, Mary J.; Oakey, Rebecca J.

doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2010.01213.x

Cited by 26 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Among the group of imprinted genes derived by retrotransposition from the X chromosome, Mcts2 retrotransposed and became imprinted around the supra-primate clade (Wood et al, 2008) and more recently still, U2af1-rs1 (or Zrsr1) was formed from the most recent retrotransposition event among the known imprinted retrogenes. It is present and imprinted in mouse and rat but absent in kangaroo rat (Dipodomys ordii), guinea pig (Cavia porcellus) and humans (McCole et al, 2011). One might expect the recently evolved imprinted genes to be particularly prone to perturbation in reciprocal hybrids.…”

Section: Differences Between the Parental Genomes Affect Imprinted Gementioning

confidence: 99%

Imprinted gene expression in hybrids: perturbed mechanisms and evolutionary implications

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diverse mechanisms contribute to the evolution of reproductive barriers, a process that is critical in speciation. Amongst these are alterations in gene products and in gene dosage that affect development and reproductive success in hybrid offspring. Because of its strict parent-of-origin dependence, genomic imprinting is thought to contribute to the aberrant phenotypes observed in interspecies hybrids in mammals and flowering plants, when the abnormalities depend on the directionality of the cross. In different groups of mammals, hybrid incompatibility has indeed been linked to loss of imprinting. Aberrant expression levels have been reported as well, including imprinted genes involved in development and growth. Recent studies in humans emphasize that genetic diversity within a species can readily perturb imprinted gene expression and phenotype as well. Despite novel insights into the underlying mechanisms, the full extent of imprinted gene perturbation still remains to be determined in the different hybrid systems. Here we review imprinted gene expression in intra-and interspecies hybrids and examine the evolutionary scenarios under which imprinting could contribute to hybrid incompatibilities. We discuss effects on development and reproduction and possible evolutionary implications.

show abstract

Section: Differences Between the Parental Genomes Affect Imprinted Gementioning

confidence: 99%

Imprinted gene expression in hybrids: perturbed mechanisms and evolutionary implications

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, YY1-binding sites are not exclusive to imprinted or other retrotransposed genes, but they do seem to have an important role in neurogenesis and a widespread distribution in the brain. Retrotransposition has also resulted in the generation of new genes that are imprinted (Upp5f, Mcts2, Nap15 and U2af1-rsl), located within host transcripts, expressed in the developing brain and derived from genes on the X chromosome [81]. Imprinted retrotransposed genes share a common genome organization, including a promoter with a DMR.…”

Section: Neocortex: Complexity Variability and Matrilineal Influencementioning

confidence: 99%

Importance of the matriline for genomic imprinting, brain development and behaviour

Keverne

2013

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mammalian brain development commences during foeto-placental development and is strongly influenced by the epigenetic regulation of imprinted genes. The foetal placenta exerts considerable influence over the functioning of the adult maternal hypothalamus, and this occurs at the same time as the foetus itself is developing a hypothalamus. Thus, the action and interaction of two genomes in one individual, the mother, has provided a template for co-adaptive functions across generations that are important for maternal care and resource transfer, while co-adaptively shaping the mothering capabilities of each subsequent generation. The neocortex is complex, enabling behavioural diversity and cultural learning such that human individuals are behaviourally unique. Retrotransposons may, in part, be epigenetic mediators of such brain diversity. Interestingly some imprinted genes are themselves retrotransposon-derived, and retrotransposon silencing by DNA methylation is thought to have contributed to the evolutionary origins of imprint control regions. The neocortex has evolved to be adaptable and sustain both short-term and long-term synaptic connections that underpin learning and memory. The adapted changes are not themselves inherited, but the predisposing mechanisms for such epigenetic changes are heritable. This provides each generation with the same ability to make new adaptations while constrained by a transgenerational knowledge-based predisposition to preserve others.

show abstract

“…The association between transposable elements (TEs) and several imprinted loci in plants and in mammals suggests that TEs play a role in establishing imprinting expression (Kaneko-Ishino and Ishino, 2010;McCole et al, 2011;Wolff et al, 2011;Walter and Paulsen, 2003;Wilkins and Haig, 2003;Okamura et al, 2004;Fujimoto et al, 2008;Hsieh et al, 2011). This hypothesis is further supported by the fact that DME might have a preference for demethylating TEs (Gehring et al, 2009).…”

Section: Research Articlementioning

confidence: 99%

RNA-directed DNA methylation regulates parental genomic imprinting at several loci in Arabidopsis

Nakamura

Calarco

et al. 2013

Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYIn mammals and plants, parental genomic imprinting restricts the expression of specific loci to one parental allele. Imprinting in mammals relies on sex-dependent de novo deposition of DNA methylation during gametogenesis but a comparable mechanism was not shown in plants. Rather, paternal silencing by the maintenance DNA methyltransferase 1 (MET1) and maternal activation by the DNA demethylase DEMETER (DME) cause maternal expression. However, genome-wide studies suggested other DNA methylationdependent imprinting mechanisms. Here, we show that de novo RNA-directed DNA methylation (RdDM) regulates imprinting at specific loci expressed in endosperm. RdDM in somatic tissues is required to silence expression of the paternal allele. By contrast, the repression of RdDM in female gametes participates with or without DME requirement in the activation of the maternal allele. The contrasted activity of DNA methylation between male and female gametes appears sufficient to prime imprinted maternal expression. After fertilization, MET1 maintains differential expression between the parental alleles. RdDM depends on small interfering RNAs (siRNAs). The involvement of RdDM in imprinting supports the idea that sources of siRNAs such as transposons and de novo DNA methylation were recruited in a convergent manner in plants and mammals in the evolutionary process leading to selection of imprinted loci.

show abstract

A Case‐by‐case Evolutionary Analysis of Four Imprinted Retrogenes

Cited by 26 publications

References 69 publications

Imprinted gene expression in hybrids: perturbed mechanisms and evolutionary implications

Imprinted gene expression in hybrids: perturbed mechanisms and evolutionary implications

Importance of the matriline for genomic imprinting, brain development and behaviour

RNA-directed DNA methylation regulates parental genomic imprinting at several loci in Arabidopsis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About