Genomic imprinting on the X chromosome: Implications for brain and behavioral phenotypes

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

Volumn 1204, Issue SUPPL.1, 2010, Pages 14-19

  Davies, William ^a  

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

39, XO mouse; Autism; Epigenetic; Imprinted genes; Rhox5; Sexual dimorphism; Turner syndrome; X inactivation; Xlr

Indexed keywords

ALLELE; ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR; COGNITION; GENE SILENCING; GENETIC COMPLEMENTATION; GENOME IMPRINTING; HUMAN; KARYOTYPING; NONHUMAN; PHENOTYPE; X CHROMOSOME; X CHROMOSOME LINKAGE; ANIMAL; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; BRAIN; GENETICS; METABOLISM; PHYSIOLOGY; REVIEW; SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT;

ANIMALIA; MAMMALIA;

ANIMALS; BEHAVIOR; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; BRAIN; GENOMIC IMPRINTING; HUMANS; PHENOTYPE; SEX CHARACTERISTICS; X CHROMOSOME;

EID: 77957595069     PISSN: 00778923     EISSN: 17496632     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2010.05567.x     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Barton, S.C., M.A. Surani & M.L. Norris. 1984. Role of paternal andmaternal genomes in mouse development. Nature 311: 374-376.
2. McGrath, J. & D. Solter. 1984. Completion of mouse embryogenesis requires both the maternal and paternal genomes. Cell 37: 179-183.
3. Bartolomei, M.S., S. Zemel & S.M. Tilghman. 1991. Parental imprinting of the mouse H19 gene. Nature 351: 153-155.
4. Willison, K. 1991. Opposite imprinting of the mouse Igf2 and Igf2r genes. Trends Genet 7: 107-109.
5. Delaval, K. & R. Feil. 2004. Epigenetic regulation of mammalian genomic imprinting. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 14: 188-195.
6. Haig, D. 2004. Genomic imprinting and kinship: how good is the evidence? Annu. Rev. Genet. 38: 553-585.
7. Hurst, L.D. & G.T. McVean. 1998. Do we understand the evolution of genomic imprinting? Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 8: 701-708.
8. Wilkins, J.F. & D. Haig. 2003. What good is genomic imprinting: the function of parent-specific gene expression. Nat. Rev. Genet. 4: 359-368.
9. Fowden, A.L. et al. 2006. Imprinted genes, placental development and fetal growth. Horm. Res. 65(Suppl. 3): 50-58.
10. Davies, W., A.R. Isles & L.S. Wilkinson. 2005. Imprinted gene expression in the brain. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 29: 421-430.
11. Wilkinson, L.S., W. Davies & A.R. Isles. 2007. Genomic imprinting effects on brain development and function. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 8: 832-843.
12. Isles, A.R. & L.S. Wilkinson. 2000. Imprinted genes, cognition and behaviour. Trends Cogn. Sci. 4: 309-318.
13. Davies, W., A.R. Isles & L.S. Wilkinson. 2001. Imprinted genes and mental dysfunction. Ann. Med. 33: 428-436.
14. Sahoo, T. et al. 2008. Prader-Willi phenotype caused by paternal deficiency for the HBII-85 C/D box small nucleolar RNA cluster. Nat. Genet. 40: 719-721.
15. Kishino, T., M. Lalande & J. Wagstaff. 1997. UBE3A/E6-AP mutations cause Angelman syndrome. Nat. Genet. 15: 70-73.
16. Cassidy, S.B. 1997. Prader-Willi syndrome. J. Med. Genet. 34: 917-923.
17. Pelc, K., G. Cheron & B. Dan. 2008. Behavior and neuropsychiatric manifestations in Angelman syndrome. Neuropsychiatr. Dis. Treat. 4: 577-584.
18. Cook, E.H., Jr. et al. 1997. Autism or atypical autism in maternally but not paternally derived proximal 15q duplication. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 60: 928-934.
19. Davies, W. et al. 2006. X-linked imprinting: effects on brain and behaviour. Bioessays 28: 35-44.
20. Erwin, J.A. & J.T. Lee. 2008. New twists in X-chromosome inactivation. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 20: 349-355.
21. Halpern, D.F. 1997. Sex differences in intelligence. Implications for education. Am. Psychol. 52: 1091-1102.
22. Cahill, L. 2006.Why sex matters for neuroscience. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 7: 477-484.
23. Skuse, D.H. et al. 1997. Evidence from Turner's syndrome of an imprinted X-linked locus affecting cognitive function. Nature 387: 705-708.
24. Skuse, D.H. 2000. Imprinting, the X-chromosome, and the male brain: explaining sex differences in the liability to autism. Pediatr. Res. 47: 9-16.
25. Bishop, D.V. et al. 2000. Distinctive patterns of memory function in subgroups of females with Turner syndrome: evidence for imprinted loci on the X-chromosome affecting neurodevelopment. Neuropsychologia 38: 712-721.
26. Cutter, W.J. et al. 2006. Influence of X chromosome and hormones on human brain development: a magnetic resonance imaging and protonmagnetic resonance spectroscopy study of Turner syndrome. Biol. Psychiatry 59: 273-283.
27. Kesler, S.R. et al. 2003. Effects of X-monosomy and Xlinked imprinting on superior temporal gyrus morphology in Turner syndrome. Biol. Psychiatry 54: 636-646.
28. Hamelin, C.E. et al. 2006. Genomic imprinting in Turner syndrome: effects on response to growth hormone and on risk of sensorineural hearing loss. J. Clin. Endocrinol.Metab. 91: 3002-3010.
29. Chu, C.E. et al. 1994. Possible role of imprinting in the Turner phenotype. J. Med. Genet. 31: 840-842.
30. Henn, W. & K.D. Zang. 1997. Mosaicism in Turner's syndrome. Nature 390: 569.
31. Bondy, C.A. et al. 2007. The physical phenotype of girls and women with Turner syndrome is not X-imprinted. Hum. Genet. 121: 469-474.
32. Davies, W. et al. 2005. Xlr3b is a new imprinted candidate for X-linked parent-of-origin effects on cognitive function in mice. Nat. Genet. 37: 625-629.
33. Raefski, A.S. &M.J. O'Neill. 2005. Identification of a cluster of X-linked imprinted genes in mice. Nat. Genet. 37: 620-624.
34. Kobayashi, S. et al. 2006. Comparison of gene expression in male and female mouse blastocysts revealed imprinting of the X-linked gene, Rhox5/Pem, at preimplantation stages. Curr. Biol. 16: 166-172.
35. Fan, Y. et al. 2005. Histone H1 depletion in mammals alters global chromatin structure but causes specific changes in gene regulation. Cell 123: 1199-1212.
36. Woodcock, C.L., A.I. Skoultchi & Y. Fan. 2006. Role of linker histone in chromatin structure and function:H1 stoichiometry and nucleosome repeat length. Chromosome Res. 14: 17-25.
37. Takeshima, H., I. Suetake & S. Tajima. 2008.Mouse Dnmt3a Preferentially Methylates Linker DNA and Is Inhibited by Histone H1. J. Mol. Biol.
38. Fujita, H. et al. 2006. Genome-wide screening of dioxinresponsive genes in fetal brain: bioinformatic and experimental approaches. Congenit Anom (Kyoto). 46: 135-143.
39. Johnson-Anuna, L.N. et al. 2005. Chronic administration of statins alters multiple gene expression patterns in mouse cerebral cortex. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 312: 786-793.
40. Jee, S.W. et al. 2006. Oligonucleotide-based analysis of differentially expressed genes in hippocampus of transgenic mice expressing NSE-controlled APPsw. Neurochem. Res. 31: 1035-1044.
41. Martinez-Garay, I. et al. 2002. A new gene family (FAM9) of low-copy repeats in Xp22.3 expressed exclusively in testis: implications for recombinations in this region. Genomics 80: 259-267.
42. Available at: http://www.informatics.jax.org/
43. Maclean, J.A., 2nd et al. 2005. Rhox: a new homeobox gene cluster. Cell 120: 369-382.