M Shuster, M S Dhar, A L Olins, D E Olins, C Y Howell, S M Gollin, J R Chaillet
{"title":"Parental alleles of an imprinted mouse transgene replicate synchronously.","authors":"M Shuster, M S Dhar, A L Olins, D E Olins, C Y Howell, S M Gollin, J R Chaillet","doi":"10.1002/(SICI)1520-6408(1998)23:4<275::AID-DVG3>3.0.CO;2-#","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Molecular features of imprinted genes include differences in expression, methylation, and the timing of DNA replication between parental alleles. Whereas methylation differences always seem to be associated with differences in expression, differences in the timing of replication between parental homologs are not always seen at imprinted loci. These observations raise the possibility that differences in replication timing may not be an essential feature underlying genomic imprinting. In this study, we examined the timing of replication of the two alleles of the imprinted RSVIgmyc transgene in individual embryonic cells using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). The cis-acting signals for RSVIgmyc imprinting are within RSVIgmyc itself. Thus, allele-specific differences in replication, if they indeed govern RSVIgmyc imprinting, should be found in RSVIgmyc sequences. We found that the parental alleles of RSVIgmyc, which exhibit differences in methylation, replicated at the same time. Synchronous replication was also seen in embryonic cells containing a modified version of RSVIgmyc that exhibited parental allele differences in both methylation and expression. These findings indicate that maintenance of expression and methylation differences between alleles does not require a difference in replication timing. The differences in replication timing of endogenous imprinted alleles detected by FISH might therefore reflect structural differences between the two alleles that could be a consequence of imprinting or, alternatively, could be unrelated to imprinting.</p>","PeriodicalId":11344,"journal":{"name":"Developmental genetics","volume":"23 4","pages":"275-84"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1998-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6408(1998)23:4<275::AID-DVG3>3.0.CO;2-#","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Developmental genetics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6408(1998)23:4<275::AID-DVG3>3.0.CO;2-#","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Molecular features of imprinted genes include differences in expression, methylation, and the timing of DNA replication between parental alleles. Whereas methylation differences always seem to be associated with differences in expression, differences in the timing of replication between parental homologs are not always seen at imprinted loci. These observations raise the possibility that differences in replication timing may not be an essential feature underlying genomic imprinting. In this study, we examined the timing of replication of the two alleles of the imprinted RSVIgmyc transgene in individual embryonic cells using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). The cis-acting signals for RSVIgmyc imprinting are within RSVIgmyc itself. Thus, allele-specific differences in replication, if they indeed govern RSVIgmyc imprinting, should be found in RSVIgmyc sequences. We found that the parental alleles of RSVIgmyc, which exhibit differences in methylation, replicated at the same time. Synchronous replication was also seen in embryonic cells containing a modified version of RSVIgmyc that exhibited parental allele differences in both methylation and expression. These findings indicate that maintenance of expression and methylation differences between alleles does not require a difference in replication timing. The differences in replication timing of endogenous imprinted alleles detected by FISH might therefore reflect structural differences between the two alleles that could be a consequence of imprinting or, alternatively, could be unrelated to imprinting.