Modern Poisons pp 148-157 | Cite as

The Earliest Exposure: Transgenerational Toxicology



When mammals are exposed to chemicals during fetal development, the outcomes can last a lifetime. In some cases, the catastrophic impacts can be due to chemical malfeasance, as exogenous chemicals masquerade as cellular signals, and alter pattern formation within the fetus. The production of freemartins or the adverse impacts of diethylstilbestrol on the reproductive systems of developing females are classic examples of such impacts upon tissue organization. Other chemicals alter development by altering the heritable material (in other words, the genes and chromosomes), and under these conditions the impacts may extend beyond the mother and her developing offspring, impacting future generations well after the original chemical exposure has subsided. This chapter focuses on the developmental origins of adult disease, and more specifically on multigenerational and transgenerational toxicology.


Epigenetic Modification Germ Line Identical Twin Imprint Gene Transgenerational Effect 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Anway, M. D., A. S. Cupp, M. Uzumcu, and M. K. Skinner. “Epigenetic Transgenerational Actions of Endocrine Disruptors and Male Fertility.” Science 308 (2005): 1466–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anway, M. D., C. Leathers, and M. K. Skinner. “Endocrine Disruptor Vinclozolin-Induced Epigenetic Transgenerational Adult-Onset Disease.” Endocrinology 147 (2006): 5515–23. Epub 2006 Sep 14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bannister, A. J., and T. Kouzarides. “Regulation of Chromatin by Histone Modifications.” Cell Research 21 (2011): 381–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barker, D. K. P., C. Osmond, P. D. Winter, B. Margetts, and S. J. Simmonds. “Weight in Infancy and Death from Ischaemic Heart Disease.” Lancet 334 (9 September 1989): 577–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carey, N. “Beyond DNA: Epigenetics.” In The Epigenetic Revolution: How Modern Biology Is Rewriting Our Understanding of Genetics, Disease, and Inheritance. New York: Columbia University Press, 2012. Excerpted in Natural History Online (n.d.).
  6. Esteller, M. “Non-Coding RNAs in Human Disease.” Nature Reviews Genetics 12 (2011): 861–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Heijmans, B. T., E. W. Tobi, A. D. Stein, H. Putter, G. J. Blauw, E. S. Susser, P. E. Slagboom, and L. H. Lumey. “Persistent Epigenetic Differences Associated with Prenatal Exposure to Famine in Humans.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 105 (2008): 17046–9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0806560105. Epub 2008 Oct 27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jirtle, R. L., and M. K. Skinner. “Environmental Epigenomics and Disease Susceptibility.” Nature Reviews Genetics 8 (2007): 253–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Louis, G. M., M. A. Cooney, and C. M. Peterson. “The Ovarian Dysgenesis Syndrome.” Journal of Developmental Origins of Health and Disease 2 (2011): 25–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lumey, L. H., M. B. Terry, L. Delgado-Cruzata, Y. Liao, Q. Wang, E. Susser, I. McKeague, and R. M. Santella. “Adult Global DNA Methylation in Relation to Pre-Natal Nutrition.” International Journal of Epidemiology 41 (2012): 116–23. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyr137. Epub 2011 Sep 29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Martin, G. M. “Epigenetic Drift in Aging Identical Twins.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 102 (2005): 10413–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Nilsson, E. E., and M. K. Skinner. “Environmentally Induced Epigenetic Transgenerational Inheritance of Disease Susceptibility.” Translational Research 165 (2015): 12–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Painter, R. C., T. J. Roseboom, and O. P. Bleker. “Prenatal Exposure to the Dutch Famine and Disease in Later Life: An Overview.” Reproductive Toxicology 20 (2005): 345–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Poulsen, P., M. Esteller, A. Vaag, and M. F. Fraga. “The Epigenetic Basis of Twin Discordance in Age-Related Diseases.” Pediatric Research 61 (2007): 38R–42R.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Prins, G. S. “Estrogen Imprinting: When Your Epigenetic Memories Come Back to Haunt You.” Endocrinology 149 (2008): 5919–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Reik, W., W. Dean, and J. Walter. “Epigenetic Reprogramming in Mammalian Development.” Science 293 (10 August 2001): 1089–92.Google Scholar
  17. Reik, W., and J. Walter. “Genomic Imprinting: Parental Influence on the Genome.” Nature Reviews Genetics 2 (2001): 21–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Schmidt, C. W. “Uncertain Inheritance Transgenerational Effects of Environmental Exposures.” Environmental Health Perspectives 121 (2013): A298–A303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Uzumcu, M., A. M. Zama, and E. Oruc. “Epigenetic Mechanisms in the Actions of Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals: Gonadal Effects and Role in Female Reproduction.” Reproduction in Domestic Animals 47 (2012): 338–47. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0531.2012.02096.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Xin, F., M. Susiarjo, and M. S. Bartolomei. “Multigenerational and Transgenerational Effects of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals: A Role for Altered Epigenetic Regulation?” Seminars in Cell Developmental Biology 43 (2015): 66–75. doi: 10.1016/j.semcdb.2015.05.008 [Epub ahead of print].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Zhang, X., and S. M. Ho. “Epigenetics Meets Endocrinology.” Journal of Molecular Endocrinology 46 (2011): R11–R32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Alan Kolok 2016

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations