Development Genes and Evolution

, Volume 215, Issue 4, pp 207–212

Allelic expression of IGF2 in live-bearing, matrotrophic fishes

  • Betty R. Lawton
  • Leila Sevigny
  • Craig Obergfell
  • David Reznick
  • Rachel J. O’Neill
  • Michael J. O’Neill
Short Communication

Abstract

The parental conflict, or kinship, theory of genomic imprinting predicts that parent-specific gene expression may evolve in species in which parental investment in developing offspring is unequal. This theory explains many aspects of parent-of-origin transcriptional silencing of embryonic growth regulatory genes in mammals, but it has not been tested in any other live-bearing, placental animals. A major embryonic growth promoting gene with conserved function in all vertebrates is insulin-like growth factor 2 (IGF2). This gene is imprinted in both eutherians and marsupials, as are several genes that modulate IGF2 activity. We have tested for parent-of-origin influences on developmental expression of IGF2 in two poeciliid fish species, Heterandria formosa and Poeciliopsis prolifica, that have evolved placentation independently. We found IGF2 to be expressed bi-allelically throughout embryonic development in both species.

Keywords

Genomic imprinting Placentation Genetic conflict Insulin-like growth factor 2 Poeciliidae 

References

  1. Greene MW, Chen TT (1997) Temporal expression pattern of insulin-like growth factor mRNA during embryonic development in a teleost, rainbow trout (Onchorynchus mykiss). Mol Mar Biol Biotechnol 6:144–151Google Scholar
  2. Haig D (1992) Genomic imprinting and the theory of parent-offspring conflict. Sem Dev Biol 3:153–160Google Scholar
  3. Haig D (2000) The kinship theory of genomic imprinting. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 31:9–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Haynes JL (1995) Standardized classification of poeciliid development for life-history studies. Copeia 1995:147–154Google Scholar
  5. Jaenisch R, Wilmut I (2001) Developmental biology. Don’t clone humans! Science 291:2552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kaneda M, Okano M, Hata K, Sado T, Tsujimoto N, Li E, Sasaki H (2004) Essential role for de novo DNA methyltransferase Dnmt3a in paternal and maternal imprinting. Nature 429:900–903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Killian JK, Byrd JC, Jirtle JV, Munday BL, Stoskopf MK, MacDonald RG, Jirtle RL (2000) M6P/IGF2R imprinting evolution in mammals. Mol Cell 5:707–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Killian JK, Nolan CM, Stewart N, Munday BL, Andersen NA, Nicol S, Jirtle RL (2001) Monotreme IGF2 expression and ancestral origin of genomic imprinting. J Exp Zool 291:205–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Martin CC, McGowan R (1995) Genotype-specific modifiers of transgene methylation and expression in the zebrafish, Danio rerio. Genet Res 65:21–28Google Scholar
  10. Morison IM, Paton CJ, Cleverley SD (2001) The imprinted gene and parent-of-origin effect database. Nucleic Acids Res 29:275–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. O’Neill MJ, Ingram RS, Vrana PB, Tilghman SM (2000) Allelic expression of IGF2 in marsupials and birds. Dev Genes Evol 210:18–20Google Scholar
  12. Pfaffl MW (2001) A new mathematical model for relative quantification in real-time RT-PCR. Nucleic Acids Res 29:e45PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Radaelli G, Patruno M, Maccatrozzo L, Funkenstein B (2003) Expression and cellular localization of insulin-like growth factor-II protein and mRNA in Sparus aurata during development. J Endocrinol 178:285–299PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Reinecke M, Collet C (1998) The phylogeny of the insulin-like growth factors. Int Rev Cytol 183:1–94Google Scholar
  15. Reznick DN, Mateos M, Springer MS (2002) Independent origins and rapid evolution of the placenta in the fish genus Poeciliopsis. Science 298:1018–1020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Rosen DE, Bailey RM (1963) The poeciliid fishes (Cyprindontiformes), their structure, zoogeography, and systematics. Bull Am Mus Nat Hist 126:1–176Google Scholar
  17. Soucy S, Travis J (2003) Multiple paternity and population genetic structure in natural populations of the poeciliid fish, Heterandria formosa. J Evol Biol 16:1328–1336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Tilghman SM (1999) The sins of the fathers and mothers: genomic imprinting in mammalian development. Cell 96:185–193CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Vrijenhoek RC (1993) The origin and evolution of clones versus the maintenance of sex in Poeciliopsis. J Hered 84:388–395Google Scholar
  20. Wilkins JF, Haig D (2003) What good is genomic imprinting: the function of parent-specific gene expression. Nat Rev Genet 4:359–368Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Betty R. Lawton
    • 1
  • Leila Sevigny
    • 1
  • Craig Obergfell
    • 1
  • David Reznick
    • 2
  • Rachel J. O’Neill
    • 1
  • Michael J. O’Neill
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Molecular and Cell BiologyUniversity of ConnecticutStorrsUSA
  2. 2.Department of BiologyUniversity of CaliforniaRiversideUSA

Personalised recommendations