An epigenetic resolution of the lek paradox

BioEssays

Volumn 38, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 355-366

  Bonilla, Melvin M ^a,b   Zeh, Jeanne A ^a   Zeh, David W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA   (United States)

^b HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Condition dependence; Epigenetically good genes hypothesis; Epigenetics; Female choice; Lek paradox

Indexed keywords

ARGININE; ARGONAUTE PROTEIN; DNA; GENOMIC DNA; HISTIDINE; HISTONE; HISTONE H4; INSULIN; LONG UNTRANSLATED RNA; LYSINE; MICRORNA; NUCLEAR PROTEIN; PIWI INTERACTING RNA; PROTAMINE; RIBOSOME RNA; RNA INDUCED SILENCING COMPLEX; TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR; TRANSFER RNA; UNTRANSLATED RNA;

ALLELE; ARTICLE; CHROMATIN; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; DIETARY INTAKE; DNA METHYLATION; DNA SEQUENCE; EPIGENETICS; FERTILIZATION; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; GAMETE; GENE INDUCTION; GENETIC MODEL; GENETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY; GENETIC TRANSCRIPTION; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENOTYPE ENVIRONMENT INTERACTION; GONAD DEVELOPMENT; HISTONE MODIFICATION; HUMAN; MALE INFERTILITY; MATE CHOICE; MEIOSIS; NONHUMAN; PHENOTYPE; PHENOTYPIC VARIATION; PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PROGENY; PSEUDOGENE; REPRODUCTIVE FITNESS; SPERM; SPERM QUALITY; SPERMATOGENESIS; SPONTANEOUS MUTATION; STRESS; TRANSPOSON; ZYGOTE; ANIMAL; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CYTOLOGY; FEMALE; GENETIC EPIGENESIS; GENETIC SELECTION; GENETIC VARIATION; GENETICS; INHERITANCE; MALE; MARKOV CHAIN; METABOLISM; PROTEIN PROCESSING; SPERMATOZOON;

ANIMALS; DNA METHYLATION; EPIGENESIS, GENETIC; FEMALE; GENE-ENVIRONMENT INTERACTION; GENETIC FITNESS; GENETIC VARIATION; HISTONES; INHERITANCE PATTERNS; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; MODELS, GENETIC; PROTEIN PROCESSING, POST-TRANSLATIONAL; RNA, UNTRANSLATED; SELECTION, GENETIC; SPERMATOZOA; STOCHASTIC PROCESSES;

EID: 84961244929     PISSN: 02659247     EISSN: 15211878     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bies.201500176     Document Type: Article

References (134)

1. Andersson M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press. p 599.
2. Zeh JA, Zeh DW. 2003. Toward a new sexual selection paradigm: polyandry, conflict and incompatibility. Ethology 109: 929-50.
3. Andersson M, Simmons LW. 2006. Sexual selection and mate choice. Trends Ecol Evol 21: 296-302.
4. Hoelzer GA. 1989. The good parent process of sexual selection. Anim Behav 38: 1067-78.
5. Senar JC, Figuerola J, Pascual J. 2002. Brighter yellow blue tits make better parents. Proc R Soc B 269: 257-61.
6. Lewis SM, Vahed K, Koene JM, Engqvist L, et al. 2014. Emerging issues in the evolution of animal nuptial gifts. Biol Lett 10: 20140336.
7. Reynolds JD, Gross MR. 1990. Costs and benefits of female mate choice - is there a lek paradox? Am Nat 136: 230-43.
8. Kirkpatrick M, Ryan MJ. 1991. The evolution of mating preferences and the paradox of the lek. Nature 350: 33-8.
9. Zahavi A. 1975. Mate selection - selection for a handicap. J Theor Biol 53: 205-14.
10. Kokko H, Brooks R, Jennions MD, Morley J. 2003. The evolution of mate choice and mating biases. Proc R Soc B 270: 653-64.
11. Kotiaho JS, Lebas NR, Puurtinen M, Tomkins JL. 2008. On the resolution of the lek paradox. Trends Ecol Evol 23: 1-3.
12. Bonduriansky R, Day T. 2013. Nongenetic inheritance and the evolution of costly female preference. J Evol Biol 26: 76-87.
13. Tomkins JL, Radwan J, Kotiaho JS, Tregenza T. 2004. Genic capture and resolving the lek paradox. Trends Ecol Evol 19: 323-8.
14. Radwan J. 2008. Maintenance of genetic variation in sexual ornaments: a review of the mechanisms. Genetica 134: 113-27.
15. Jirtle RL, Skinner MK. 2007. Environmental epigenomics and disease susceptibility. Nat Rev Genet 8: 253-62.
16. Trivers RL. 1972. Parental Investment and Sexual Selection. In Campbell B, ed; Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man, 1871-1971. Chicago, USA: Aldine. pp 136-179.
17. Sheldon BC. 1994. Male phenotype, fertility, and the pursuit of extra-pair copulations by female birds. Proc R Soc B 257: 25-30.
18. Rowe L, Houle D. 1996. The lek paradox and the capture of genetic variance by condition dependent traits. Proc R Soc B 263: 1415-21.
19. Crews D, Gore AC, Hsu TS, Dangleben NL, et al. 2007. Transgenerational epigenetic imprints on mate preference. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104: 5942-6.
20. Zeh JA, Zeh DW. 2008. Maternal inheritance, epigenetics and the evolution of polyandry. Genetica 134: 45-54.
21. Bonilla MM. 2014 Strategic sperm allocation, sperm competition, and an epigenetically based resolution of the lek paradox. PhD Dissertation, University of Nevada, Reno NV, USA.
22. Hackett JA, Surani MA. 2013. Beyond DNA: programming and inheritance of parental methylomes. Cell 153: 737-9.
23. Lane M, Robker RL, Robertson SA. 2014. Parenting from before conception. Science 345: 756-60.
24. Feil R, Fraga MF. 2012. Epigenetics and the environment: emerging patterns and implications. Nat Rev Genet 13: 97-109.
25. Klironomos FD, Berg J, Collins S. 2013. How epigenetic mutations can affect genetic evolution: model and mechanism. BioEssays 35: 571-8.
26. Soubry A, Hoyo C, Jirtle RL, Murphy SK. 2014. A paternal environmental legacy: evidence for epigenetic inheritance through the male germ line. BioEssays 36: 359-71.
27. Soubry A. 2015. Epigenetic inheritance and evolution: a paternal perspective on dietary influences. Prog Biophys Mol Biol 118: 79-85.
28. Paul B, Barnes S, Demark-Wahnefried W, Morrow C, et al. 2015. Influences of diet and the gut microbiome on epigenetic modulation in cancer and other diseases. Clin Epigen 7: 112.
29. Lee T-f, Zhai J, Meyers BC. 2010. Conservation and divergence in eukaryotic DNA methylation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107: 9027-8.
30. Smith ZD, Meissner A. 2013. DNA methylation: roles in mammalian development. Nat Rev Genet 14: 204-20.
31. Jones PA. 2012. Functions of DNA methylation: islands, start sites, gene bodies and beyond. Nat Rev Genet 13: 484-92.
32. Maor GL, Yearim A, Ast G. 2015. The alternative role of DNA methylation in splicing regulation. Trends Genet 31: 274-80.
33. Head JA. 2014. Patterns of DNA methylation in animals: an ecotoxicological perspective. Integrat Comp Biol 54: 77-86.
34. Yan H, Bonasio R, Simola DF, Liebig J, et al. 2014. DNA methylation in social insects: how epigenetics can control behavior and longevity. Ann Rev Entomol 60: 435-52.
35. Alvarado S, Rajakumar R, Abouheif E, Szyf M. 2015. Epigenetic variation in the Egfr gene generates quantitative variation in a complex trait in ants. Nat Commun 6: 6513.
36. Ruden DM, Cingolani PE, Sen A, W Qu, et al. 2015. Epigenetics as an answer to Darwin's "special difficulty, " Part 2: natural selection of metastable epialleles in honeybee castes. Front Genet 6: 60.
37. Ernst UR, Van Hiel MB, Depuydt G, Boerjan B, et al. 2015. Epigenetics and locust life phase transitions. J Exper Biol 218: 88-99.
38. Asselman J, De Coninck DIM, Vandegehuchte MB, Jansen M, et al. 2015. Global cytosine methylation in Daphnia magna depends on genotype, environment, and their interaction. Environ Toxicol Chem 34: 1056-61.
39. Holoch D, Moazed D. 2015. RNA-mediated epigenetic regulation of gene expression. Nat Rev Genet 16: 71-84.
40. Bartel DP. 2009. MicroRNAs: target recognition and regulatory functions. Cell 136: 215-33.
41. Fabian MR, Sonenberg N. 2012. The mechanics of miRNA-mediated gene silencing: a look under the hood of miRISC. Nat Struct Mol Biol 19: 586-93.
42. Flynt AS, Lai EC. 2008. Biological principles of microRNA-mediated regulation: shared themes amid diversity. Nat Rev Genet 9: 831-42.
43. Sun H, Kennedy PJ, Nestler EJ. 2013. Epigenetics of the depressed brain: role of histone acetylation and methylation. Neuropsychopharmacol 38: 124-37.
44. Siomi MC, Sato K, Pezic D, Aravin AA. 2011. PIWI-interacting small RNAs: the vanguard of genome defence. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 12: 246-58.
45. Lin HF, Spradling AC. 1997. A novel group of pumilio mutations affects the asymmetric division of germline stem cells in the Drosophila ovary. Development 124: 2463-76.
46. Cox DN, Chao A, Baker J, Chang L, et al. 1998. A novel class of evolutionarily conserved genes defined by piwi are essential for stem cell self-renewal. Genes Dev 12: 3715-27.
47. Schmidt A, Palumbo G, Bozzetti MP, Tritto P, et al. 1999. Genetic and molecular characterization of sting, a gene involved in crystal formation and meiotic drive in the male germ line of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 151: 749-60.
48. Carmell MA, Girard A, van de Kant HJG, Bourc'his D, et al. 2007. MIWI2 is essential for spermatogenesis and repression of transposons in the mouse male germline. Dev Cell 12: 503-14.
49. Aravin AA, Sachidanandam R, Girard A, Fejes-Toth K, et al. 2007. Developmentally regulated piRNA clusters implicate MILI in transposon control. Science 316: 744-7.
50. Kuramochi-Miyagawa S, Watanabe T, Gotoh K, Totoki Y, et al. 2008. DNA methylation of retrotransposon genes is regulated by Piwi family members MILI and MIWI2 in murine ftestes. Genes Dev 22: 908-17.
51. Watanabe T, Tomizawa S-i, Mitsuya K, Totoki Y, et al. 2011. Role for piRNAs and noncoding RNA in de novo DNA methylation of the imprinted mouse Rasgrf1 locus. Science 332: 848-52.
52. Rajasethupathy P, Antonov I, Sheridan R, Frey S, et al. 2012. A role for neuronal piRNAs in the epigenetic control of memory-related synaptic plasticity. Cell 149: 693-707.
53. Luteijn MJ, Ketting RF. 2013. PIWI-interacting RNAs: from generation to transgenerational epigenetics. Nat Rev Genet 14: 523-34.
54. Kiuchi T, Koga H, Kawamoto M, Shoji K, et al. 2014. A single female-specific piRNA is the primary determiner of sex in the silkworm. Nature 509: 633-6.
55. Grote P, Herrmann BG. 2015. Long noncoding RNAs in organogenesis: making the difference. Trends Genet 31: 329-35.
56. Tan M, Luo H, Lee S, Jin F, et al. 2011. Identification of 67 histone marks and histone lysine crotonylation as a new type of histone modification. Cell 146: 1015-27.
57. Turner BM. 2012. The adjustable nucleosome: an epigenetic signaling module. Trends Genet 28: 436-44.
58. Shahbazian MD, Grunstein M. 2007. Functions of site-specific histone acetylation and deacetylation. Annu Rev Biochem 76: 75-100.
59. Bannister AJ, Kouzarides T. 2011. Regulation of chromatin by histone modifications. Cell Res 21: 381-95.
60. Greer EL, Shi Y. 2012. Histone methylation: a dynamic mark in health, disease and inheritance. Nat Rev Genet 13: 343-57.
61. Yan W. 2014. Potential roles of noncoding RNAs in environmental epigenetic transgenerational inheritance. Mol Cell Endocrinol 398: 24-30.
62. Itou D, Shiromoto Y, Shin-ya Y, Ishii C, et al. 2015. Induction of DNA methylation by artificial piRNA production in male germ cells. Curr Biol 25: 901-6.
63. Keung AJ, Joung JK, Khalil AS, Collins JJ. 2015. Chromatin regulation at the frontier of synthetic biology. Nat Rev Genet 16: 159-71.
64. Delbridge LMD, Mellor KM, Wold LE. 2015. Epigenetics and cardiovascular disease. Life Sci 129: 1-2.
65. Timp W, Feinberg AP. 2013. Cancer as a dysregulated epigenome allowing cellular growth advantage at the expense of the host. Nat Rev Cancer 13: 497-510.
66. Reddy MA, Zhang E, Natarajan R. 2015. Epigenetic mechanisms in diabetic complications and metabolic memory. Diabetologia 58: 443-55.
67. Brucato N, DeLisi LE, Fisher SE, Francks C. 2014. Hypomethylation of the paternally inherited LRRTM1 promoter linked to schizophrenia. Am J Med Genet B 165: 555-63.
68. Guerrero-Bosagna C, Skinner MK. 2014. Environmentally induced epigenetic transgenerational inheritance of male infertility. Curr Opin Genet Dev 26: 79-88.
69. Schultz N, Hamra FK, Garbers DL. 2003. A multitude of genes expressed solely in meiotic or postmeiotic spermatogenic cells offers a myriad of contraceptive targets. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100: 12201-6.
70. Vibranovski MD, Chalopin DS, Lopes HF, Long M, et al. 2010. Direct evidence for postmeiotic transcription during Drosophila melanogaster spermatogenesis. Genetics 186: 431-3.
71. Soumillon M, Necsulea A, Weier M, Brawand D, et al. 2013. Cellular source and mechanisms of high transcriptome complexity in the mammalian testis. Cell Rep 3: 2179-90.
72. Skinner MK. 2015. Environmental epigenetics and a unified theory of the molecular aspects of evolution: A neo-Lamarckian concept that facilitates neo-Darwinian evolution. Genome Biol Evol 7: 1296-302.
73. Boissonnas CC, Jouannet P, Jammes H. 2013. Epigenetic disorders and male subfertility. Fertil Steril 99: 624-31.
74. Gannon JR, Emery BR, Jenkins TG, Carrell DT. 2014. The sperm epigenome: implications for the embryo. Genet Damage Hum Spermat 791: 53-66.
75. Balhorn R. 2007. The protamine family of sperm nuclear proteins. Genome Biol 8: 227.
76. Carrell DT, Liu LH. 2001. Altered protamine 2 expression is uncommon in donors of known fertility, but common among men with poor fertilizing capacity, and may reflect other abnormalities of spermiogenesis. J Androl 22: 604-10.
77. Aoki VW, Liu L, Jones KP, Hatasaka HH, Gibson M, et al. 2006. Sperm protamine 1/protamine 2 ratios are related to in vitro fertilization pregnancy rates and predictive of fertilization ability. Fertil Steril 86: 1408-15.
78. Siklenka K, Erkek S, Godman M, Lambrot R, et al. 2015. Disruption of histone methylation in developing sperm impairs offspring health transgenerationally. Science 350: 6261.
79. Hammoud SS, Nix DA, Hammoud AO, Gibson M, et al. 2011. Genome-wide analysis identifies changes in histone retention and epigenetic modifications at developmental and imprinted gene loci in the sperm of infertile men. Hum Reprod 26: 2558-69.
80. Benchaib M, Braun V, Ressnikof D, Lornage J, et al. 2005. Influence of global sperm DNA methylation on IVF results. Hum Reprod 20: 768-73.
81. Houshdaran S, Cortessis VK, Siegmund K, Yang A, et al. 2007. Widespread epigenetic abnormalities suggest a broad DNA methylation erasure defect in abnormal human sperm. PLoS ONE 2: e1289.
82. Urdinguio RG, Bayon GF, Dmitrijeva M, Torano EG, et al. 2015. Aberrant DNA methylation patterns of spermatozoa in men with unexplained infertility. Hum Reprod 30: 1014-28.
83. Richardson ME, Bleiziffer A, Tuettelmann F, Gromoll J, et al. 2014. Epigenetic regulation of the RHOX homeobox gene cluster and its association with human male infertility. Hum Mol Genet 23: 12-23.
84. Webster KE, O'Bryan MK, Fletcher S, Crewther PE, et al. 2005. Meiotic and epigenetic defects in Dnmt3L-knockout mouse spermatogenesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102: 4068-73.
85. Jodar M, Selvaraju S, Sendler E, Diamond MP, et al. 2013. The presence, role and clinical use of spermatozoal RNAs. Hum Reprod Update 19: 604-24.
86. Chen Q, Yan M, Cao Z, X Li, et al. 2016. Sperm tsRNAs contribute to intergenerational inheritance of an acquired metabolic disorder. Science 351: 397-400.
87. Kotaja N. 2014. MicroRNAs and spermatogenesis. Fertil Steril 101: 1552-62.
88. Abu-Halima M, Hammadeh M, Schmitt J, Leidinger P, et al. 2013. Altered microRNA expression profiles of human spermatozoa in patients with different spermatogenic impairments. Fertil Steril 99: 1249-55.
89. Comazzetto S, Di Giacomo M, Rasmussen KD, Much C, et al. 2014. Oligoasthenoteratozoospermia and infertility in mice deficient for miR-34b/c and miR-449 loci. PLoS Genet 10: e1004597.
90. Waterland RA, Michels KB. 2007. Epigenetic epidemiology of the developmental origins hypothesis. Annu Rev Nutr 27: 363-88.
91. Bonasio R, Tu S, Reinberg D. 2010. Molecular signals of epigenetic states. Science 330: 612-6.
92. Crean AJ, Bonduriansky R. 2014. What is a paternal effect? Trends Ecol Evol 29: 554-9.
93. Radford EJ, Ito M, Shi H, Corish JA, et al. 2014. In utero undernourishment perturbs the adult sperm methylome and intergenerational metabolism. Science 345: 1255903.
94. Öst A, Lempradl A, Casas E, Weigert M, et al. 2014. Paternal diet defines offspring chromatin state and intergenerational obesity. Cell 159: 1352-64.
95. Danchin E, Charmantier A, Champagne FA, Mesoudi A, et al. 2011. Beyond DNA: integrating inclusive inheritance into an extended theory of evolution. Nat Rev Genet 12: 475-86.
96. Heard E, Martienssen RA. 2014. Transgenerational epigenetic inheritance: myths and mechanisms. Cell 157: 95-109.
97. Wei Y, Schatten H, Sun Q-Y. 2015. Environmental epigenetic inheritance through gametes and implications for human reproduction. Hum Reprod Update 21: 194-208.
98. Dias BG, Ressier KJ. 2014. Parental olfactory experience influences behavior and neural structure in subsequent generations. Nat Neurosci 17: 89-96.
99. Gapp K, Jawaid A, Sarkies P, Bohacek J, et al. 2014. Implication of sperm RNAs in transgenerational inheritance of the effects of early trauma in mice. Nat Neurosci 17: 667-9.
100. Visscher PM, Brown MA, McCarthy MI, et al. 2012. Five years of GWAS discovery. Am J Hum Genet 90: 7-24.
101. Rando OJ, Simmons RA. 2015. I'm eating for two: parental dietary effects on offspring metabolism. Cell 161: 93-105.
102. Wood AR, Esko T, Yang J, Vedantam S, et al. 2014. Defining the role of common variation in the genomic and biological architecture of adult human height. Nat Genet 46: 1173-86.
103. Sullivan PF, Daly MJ, Ripke S, Lewis CM, et al. 2013. A mega-analysis of genome-wide association studies for major depressive disorder. Mol Psych 18: 497-511.
104. Demirkan A, Penninx BWJH, Hek K, Wray NR, et al. 2011. Genetic risk profiles for depression and anxiety in adult and elderly cohorts. Mol Psychiatry 16: 773-83.
105. Weksberg R, Shuman C, Caluseriu O, Smith AC, et al. 2002. Discordant KCNQ1OT1 imprinting in sets of monozygotic twins discordant for Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome. Hum Mol Genet 11: 1317-25.
106. Wong CCY, Caspi A, Williams B, Craig IW, et al. 2010. A longitudinal study of epigenetic variation in twins. Epigenetics 5: 516-26.
107. Bell JT, Spector TD. 2011. A twin approach to unraveling epigenetics. Trends Genet 27: 116-25.
108. Hill GE. 2011. Condition-dependent traits as signals of the functionality of vital cellular processes. Ecol Lett 14: 625-34.
109. Kaelin WG, Jr., McKnight SL. 2013. Influence of metabolism on epigenetics and disease. Cell 153: 56-69.
110. Johnston VS. 2006. Mate choice decisions: the role of facial beauty. Trends Cogn Sci 10: 9-13.
111. Crossley KL, Cornelissen PL, Tovee MJ. 2012. What is an attractive body? Using an interactive 3D program to create the ideal body for you and your partner. PLoS ONE 7: e50601.
112. Milagro FI, Campion J, Cordero P, Goyenechea E, et al. 2011. A dual epigenomic approach for the search of obesity biomarkers: DNA methylation in relation to diet-induced weight loss. FASEB J 25: 1378-89.
113. Ortega FJ, Mercader JM, Catalán V, Moreno-Navarrete JM, et al. 2013. Targeting the circulating microRNA signature of obesity. Clin Chem 59: 781-92.
114. Hakonsen LB, Thulstrup AM, Aggerholm AS, Olsen J, et al. 2011. Does weight loss improve semen quality and reproductive hormones? Results from a cohort of severely obese men. Reprod Health 8: 24.
115. McPherson NO, Bakos HW, Owens JA, Setchell BP, et al. 2013. Improving metabolic health in obese male mice via diet and exercise restores embryo development and fgrowth. PLoS ONE 8: e71459.
116. McPherson NO, Fullston T, Bakos HW, Setchell BP, et al. 2014. Obese father's metabolic state, adiposity, and reproductive capacity indicate son's reproductive health. Fertil Steril 101: 865-73.e1.
117. McPherson NO, Owens JA, Fullston T, Lane M. 2015. Preconception diet or exercise intervention in obese fathers normalizes sperm microRNA profile and metabolic syndrome in female offspring. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metabol 308: E805-21.
118. Bonduriansky R, Head M. 2007. Maternal and paternal condition effects on offspring phenotype in Telostylinus angusticollis (Diptera: Neriidae). J Evol Biol 20: 2379-88.
119. Bonduriansky R, Mallet MA, Arbuthnott D, Pawlowsky-Glahn V, et al. 2015. Differential effects of genetic vs. environmental quality in Drosophila melanogaster suggest multiple forms of condition dependence. Ecol Lett 18: 317-26.
120. Chemnitz J, Jentschke PC, Ayasse M, Steiger S. 2015. Beyond species recognition: somatic state affects long-distance sex pheromone communication. Proc R Soc B 282: 224-32.
121. Rahman MM, Turchini GM, Gasparini C, Norambuena F, et al. 2014. The expression of pre- and postcopulatory sexually selected traits reflects levels of dietary stress in guppies. PLoS ONE 9: e105856.
122. Lavine L, Gotoh H, Brent CS, Dworkin I, et al. 2015. Exaggerated trait growth in insects. Annu Rev Entomol 60: 453-72.
123. Emlen DJ, Warren IA, Johns A, Dworkin I, et al. 2012. A mechanism of extreme growth and reliable signaling in sexually selected ornaments and weapons. Science 337: 860-4.
124. Lupu F, Terwilliger JD, Lee K, Segre GV, et al. 2001. Roles of growth hormone and insulin-like growth factor 1 in mouse postnatal growth. Dev Biol 229: 141-62.
125. Goodspeed D, Seferovic MD, Holland W, McKnight RA, et al. 2015. Essential nutrient supplementation prevents heritable metabolic disease in multigenerational intrauterine growth-restricted rats. FASEB J 29: 807-19.
126. Fung CM, Yang Y, Fu Q, Brown AS, et al. 2015. IUGR prevents IGF-1 upregulation in juvenile male mice by perturbing postnatal IGF-1 chromatin remodeling. Pediatr Res 78: 14-23.
127. Nef S, Verma-Kurvari S, Merenmies J, Vassalli JD, et al. 2003. Testis determination requires insulin receptor family function in mice. Nature 426: 291-5.
128. Xu J, Anciro AL, Palli SR. 2015. Nutrition regulation of male accessory gland growth and maturation in Tribolium castaneum. Sci Rep 5: 10567.
129. Wong CL, Lee KH, Lo KM, Chan OC, et al. 2007. Ablation of paternal accessory sex glands imparts physical and behavioural abnormalities to the progeny: An in vivo study in the golden hamster. Theriogenology 68: 654-62.
130. Poon HK, Lee KH, Wong CL, Chow PH. 2009. Absence of paternal accessory sex gland secretions disturbs epigenetic reprogramming and expression of Igf2 and Dlk1 in golden hamster embryos. Theriogenology 71: 1367-80.
131. Rogers AB, Morgan CP, Leu NA, Bale TL. 2015. Transgenerational epigenetic programming via sperm microRNA recapitulates effects of paternal stress. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112: 13699-704.
132. Jenkin F. 1867. The origin of species. N Brit Rev 46: 277-318.
133. Darwin C. 1868. The Variation of Animals and Plants Under Domestication. London, UK: John Murray. p 411.
134. Weismann A. 1892. Das Keimplasma. Eine Theorie der Vererbung. Jena, Germany: Fischer. p 628.