Back

Epigenetic change induced by in utero dietary challenge provokes phenotypic variability across multiple generations of mice

Van de Pette, M.; Galvao, A.; Millership, S. J.; To, W.; Dimond, A.; Prodani, C.; McNamara, G.; Bruno, L.; Sardini, A.; Webster, Z.; McGinty, J.; French, P. M.; Uren, A.; Castillo-Fernandez, J.; John, R. M.; Ferguson-Smith, A.; Merkenschlager, M.; Kelsey, G. D.; Fisher, A. G.

2020-08-07 developmental biology
10.1101/2020.08.07.241034 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Transmission of epigenetic information between generations occurs in nematodes, flies and plants, mediated by specialised small RNA pathways, histone H3K9me3, H3K27me3, H4K16ac and DNA methylation1-3. In higher vertebrates, epidemiological and experimental evidence supports similar trans-generational effects4,5 although the mechanisms that underpin these are incompletely understood6-9. We generated a luciferase reporter knock-in mouse for the imprinted Dlk1 locus, to visualise and track epigenetic fidelity across generations. We showed that exposure to high-fat diet (HFD) in pregnancy provokes sustained re-expression of the normally silent maternal Dlk1 allele in offspring, coincident with increased DNA methylation at the Dlk1 sDMR. Interestingly, maternal Dlk1 mis-expression was also evident in the next generation (F2), exclusively in animals derived from F1-exposed females. Oocytes from these females showed altered microRNA and gene expression, without any major changes in underlying DNA methylation, and correctly imprinted Dlk1 expression resumed in subsequent generations (F3 onwards). Our results reveal how canonical and non-canonical imprinting mechanisms enable the foetal epigenome to adapt to in utero challenge to modulate the properties of two successive generations of offspring.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.