'New Lamarcksim' - parental experience influences genetic make-up

MichaelMcF
Science Freak
MichaelMcF's picture
Posts: 525
Joined: 2008-01-22
User is offlineOffline
'New Lamarcksim' - parental experience influences genetic make-up

I'm paraphrasing an article from New Scientist here for those that don't have access.  Much of the phrasing comes from the original printed article, and all should be credited to Emma Young.

 

It seems that a growing number of scientists are finding that environmental factors can have an impact on the traits of an individual, and on the traits their offspring will inherit, without any major changes to the genetic sequence itself.   This has been dubbed  'New Lamarcksim' after Jean-Baptiste Lamarck who proposed that characteristics acquired during a lifetime can be passed on to offspring.

This work centres around epigenetics.  Epigenetics deals with how genes are regulated and expressed in a cell and is the basis for the formation of the different tissues in our body from cells comprising identical genetic stock.  We know that genes - and possible non-codind DNA - control RNAi and are involved in determining epigenetic settings, but it is now becoming increasinly apparent that environmental factors have an impact as well.  The best example of this comes from honeybees.  All female honeybees develop from genetically identical larvae, but those fed on royal jelly become fertile queens while others are doomed to life as sterile workers.  In March this year a team led Ryszard Maleszka showed that epigenetic mechanisms account for this.  They used RNAi to silence a gene for DNA methyltransferase in honeybee larvae.  Most of these larvae emerged as queens without ever having tasted royal jelly.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/reprint/319/5871/1827.pdf

In 2000 a team at Duke University performed an experiment on genetically identical mice.  The mice carried the agouti gene which makes them fat and prone to cancer.  One group of females was given a diet rich in methyl groups before conception and during pregnancy.  Their offspring were slim and lived to a "ripe old age".  The same results were found with females given genistein, an oestrogen-like compound found in soya.  The dose was designed to be comparable to a human on a high soya diet.  The chance was associated with increased methylation of 6 DNA base-pair sites which regulate the agouti gene.

These studies indicated that the diet of a mother (and thus her natal offspring) can have a huge impact on the traits displayed by her children in later life.  However, diet is not the only environmental factor that can influence traits.  Michael Meaney at McGill University found that mice negelcted by their mothers are more likely to be fearful in adulthood, and that these mice show much higher levels of methylation of certain genes involved in stress response.

In humans too, there are hints that damaging experiences in early life can also affect epigenetic settings.  Meaney and his colleagues reported a study of 13 men who had commited suicide, all of whom had been victims of child abuse.  They showed clear epigenetic differences in their brains compared with the brains of men who had died of other causes.  It is possible that these chances may have been caused by their experiences as children, and it is suggested could have attributed to their suicides as well.

Arturas Petronis, at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto, reported an epigenome-wide scan of brain tissue from 35 people who had suffered from schizophrenia (American Journal of Human Genetics, vol 82, p 696).  He and his colleagues found a distinctive epigenetic pattern, controlling expression of roughly 40 genes.  As with the suicidal men in Meaney's study, these epigenetic marks may have arisen during early development.  Yet there are also hints that those with schizophrenia inherited the traits from their parents, and that they in turn might pass the marks onto their children.  In theory, epigenetic marks are wiped clear between generations in mammals.  The abnormalities in Petronis's subjects were not restricted to the frontal cortex: they were also present in their sperm. 

In fact some papers are now suggesting that diseases such as cancer could be inherited through epigenetic changes in the mother (The New England Journal of Medicine, vol 356, p697).  Paternal inheritance has also been raised by Matthew Anway.  Anway and colleagues demonstrated that rats exposed to the fungicide vinclozolin while in the womb were less fertile and had a higher than normal risk of developing kidney defects (Science, vol 308, p 1466).  These effects were passed from father to son through 3/4 generations.  The team found no DNA changes only altered methylation patterns in the sperm.  Not only that, but these males tended to be avoided by females, who appeared to be selecting on an epigenetic basis rather than a genetic one.  This has reinforced the suggestion that epigenetic variation could be adaptive (the water flea daphnia, for example, develop large, defensive spines when predators are around.  If they then reproduce their offspring also have the spines, even if there are no predators around).

 

So the diet we consume and our environment may actually have an impact on the traits we pass onto our children without requiring any change to our DNA.

 

M

 

 

 

Forget Jesus, the stars died so that you could be here
- Lawrence Krauss


nikimoto
nikimoto's picture
Posts: 235
Joined: 2008-07-21
User is offlineOffline
Very interesting. Thanks!

Very interesting. Thanks!


MichaelMcF
Science Freak
MichaelMcF's picture
Posts: 525
Joined: 2008-01-22
User is offlineOffline
Oops!

As an aside... apologies for the numerous spelling errors.  I don't know what happened there.

 

In addition to what's already been said, it seems that mice that have inhaled cocaine pass on memory problems to their pups.  Again there is no change in the parental DNA but there is a change in the level of production of 2 enzymes which methylate DNA in the father's seminiferous tubules.

M

Forget Jesus, the stars died so that you could be here
- Lawrence Krauss


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote:So the diet we consume

Quote:
So the diet we consume and our environment may actually have an impact on the traits we pass onto our children without requiring any change to our DNA.

I can't recall the source of this knowledge floating around in my brain, but I distinctly remember reading that schizophrenia is linked to the absorption of a particular kind of fat by brain cells.  It wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that the mother's diet contributes to the way genes influencing fat absorption express in offspring.

The really interesting thing about the article you're referencing is that these findings are directly in line with the predictions of evolutionary psych.  I've been waiting for a while for someone to explain the mechanisms behind the nature/nurture system.  This could be a big step in the right direction.

 

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Mazid the Raider
Rational VIP!Science Freak
Mazid the Raider's picture
Posts: 128
Joined: 2007-12-28
User is offlineOffline
Yeah, I heard about this a

Yeah, I heard about this a while back - seems like all those nasty chemicals they put in our parent's and grandparent's food and water and houses and plates (etc) is going to come back and haunt us Sad

"But still I am the Cat who walks by himself, and all places are alike to me!" ~Rudyard Kipling

Mazid the Raider says: I'd rather face the naked truth than to go "augh, dude, put some clothes on or something" and hand him some God robes, cause you and I know that the naked truth is pale, hairy, and has an outie
Entomophila says: Ew. AN outie


greek goddess
Rational VIP!Science Freak
greek goddess's picture
Posts: 361
Joined: 2008-01-26
User is offlineOffline
This is amazing to read

This is amazing to read about. I especially found the part concerning schizophrenia interesting, as mental illness has plagued the Greek half of my lineage. My maternal grandmother has schizophrenia, among numerous other disorders, and it is something I fear getting, since I resemble her in appearance, and already have had anorexia, bulimia, severe depression, and panic disorder in common with her. My parents have suffered no mental illness, but my mom's sister has also experienced anorexia, bulimia, anxiety disorder, and debilitating depression.

It's really interesting to see this pattern repeat itself over several generations, and I wonder if something like DNA methylation doesn't at least play a role in its propagation. Maybe someday research like this will be able to inform us whether we are genetically at risk for mental illness and other conditions.


MichaelMcF
Science Freak
MichaelMcF's picture
Posts: 525
Joined: 2008-01-22
User is offlineOffline
Mazid the Raider wrote:Yeah,

Mazid the Raider wrote:

Yeah, I heard about this a while back - seems like all those nasty chemicals they put in our parent's and grandparent's food and water and houses and plates (etc) is going to come back and haunt us Sad

 

There is another bit to the article about this... I don't have it to hand just now but I can give more detail tomorrow.  Essentially there's a study done that suggests the quantity of food available to our ancestors can also affect us.  In one population those individuals whose grandparents had lived on the bare minimum of food were found to have greatly increased lifespans.

 

I'll edit this with better information when I'm back in work.

M

Forget Jesus, the stars died so that you could be here
- Lawrence Krauss


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Another intriguing part of

Another intriguing part of this puzzle.  It appears that a mother's food intake during pregnancy seems to have an affect on her offspring for about three generations.  Birth weight is correlated to a great many conditions later in life, including heart disease.  After World War II, there was an involuntary experiment conducted with several countries in Europe.  Stark poverty and hunger were rampant in some countries, while others had foreign aid and relative prosperity.  In examining the differences between these countries, we've found that two to three generations after these sudden changes in diet, there is still a correlation.  Ironically, those countries which went from severe poverty (during the war) to relative prosperity (from foreign aid) were cursing their descendants, as it appears that the babies born to the poor mothers were "geared" towards a life of poverty.  When they then led lives of prosperity (food intake-wise) they essentially gave themselves a lot of heart disease.  By contrast, those babies which went on to live in conditions similar to their mothers did not suffer nearly as high a rate of heart disease.  Babies in prosperous countries whose mothers were also in prosperous conditions have resemble the poor - poor descendants.

 

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


MichaelMcF
Science Freak
MichaelMcF's picture
Posts: 525
Joined: 2008-01-22
User is offlineOffline
And the extra stuff

Here's the extra stuff I didn't include from the article.  Again all credit should go to the original author, Emma Young.

 

"In people too, there is evidence that environmental impacts on fathers and mothers can produce changes in their children.  Could the current epidemic of type II diabetes and obesity in developed countries be related to what our parents and out grandparents ate?

Marcus Pembrey and his colleagues analysed recordes from the isolated community of Overkalix in northern Sweden and found that men whose paternal grandfathers had suffered a shortage of food between the ages of 9 and 12 lived longer than their peers (European Journal of Human Genetics, vol 14, p159).  A similar maternal-line effect existed for women, but in this case by far the biggest effect on the longevity of the granddaughters occured when food was limited while grandmothers were in the womb or were infants.  It would appear that humans thrive on relatively meagre rations, and the team concluded that under these conditions some sort of key information - perhaps epigenetic - was being captured at the crucial stages of sperm and egg formation, then passed down generations.

Pembrey's team also looked at more recent records from the UK.  They identified 166 fathers who reported starting smoking before the age of 11 and found that their sons - but not their daughters - had a significantly higher than average body mass index at the age of 9.

In 2006 Tony Hsiu-Hsi Chen and colleagues reported that the offspring of men who regularly chewed betel nuts had twice the normal risk of developing metabolic syndrome during childhood - symptoms of which are prevalent amongst those who chew the nuts.

Women in the Netherlands who were in the first two trimesters of pregnancy during a famine in  1944 and 1945 gave birth to boys who, at 19, were much more likely to be obese.

 

One suggestion is that long before the emergence of modern humans, a network of metabolic genes evolved that was honed for relative scarcity of food, but not feast or famine.  These genes have become epigenetically programmed during early stages of life in response to adverse environmental conditions - such as feast.  This might explain the epidemic of type II diabetes and obesity in the west.  Prolonged epigenetic silencing in response to the environment might also lead to a DNA change that "locks in" epigenetic marks.

 

M

Forget Jesus, the stars died so that you could be here
- Lawrence Krauss


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Exactly the kind of thing I

Exactly the kind of thing I was talking about.  I don't know enough about it to comment on prolonged epigenetic silencing leading to a genotypic change.  Sounds really interesting, though.

On a slightly related side note, one of the biggest hurdles I find in trying to explain the science of human nature is people's reluctance (or outright refusal) to recognize the fact that our brains are an organ, just like our heart and liver, and they are genetically programmed to perform in a certain way, again like our heart or liver.  The burden of proof has been shifted by years of falsely assuming humans to be different than animals.  Darwin changed our understanding of the origin of humanity, but we are still, even after 150 years, laboring under the delusion that scientists need to prove that our brains are just as instinct driven as any other animal's.  Clearly, it would be a remarkable turn of events if one species had, in an incredibly short evolutionary time period, eradicated instinct and become a clean environmental slate.  It is not scientists who owe an explanation.  Anyone who claims that humans are not largely governed by their instincts needs to build a massive case for that claim because it flies in the face of not only mountains of accumulated data, but the predictions of natural selection theory!

The kind of research in this thread is going a long way to show that our environment and our genes are symbiotes of a sort, with one reinforcing the other as genes express themselves through the growth and development period.  It's already been noted here and elsewhere on the board that schizophrenia appears to have similar epigenetic factors, and IIRC, so does bipolar disorder.  Having thoroughly documented the unconscious nature of our decisions (ARTICLE) and having thoroughly demonstrated that changes in genes do change the way we think, it seems to me that there is no debate about whether or not we are genetically designed to think in prescribed ways with prescribed tendencies.  The only debatable subject is why this isn't common knowledge.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism