Epistasis — the essential role of gene interactions in the structure and evolution of genetic systems.¶
Phillips, P. C. (2008). Epistasis — the essential role of gene interactions in the structure and evolution of genetic systems. Nature Reviews Genetics, 9(11), 855-867.
Cited by¶
3 citations across 3 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Conjunctive Path Activation
- In genetics, epistatic interactions express a phenotype only under the AND of specific genotype combinations across loci, the literature explicitly contrasting additive with conjunctive effects.
This sourceContrasts additive with conjunctive (epistatic) genetic effects, where a phenotype expresses only under specific multi-locus genotype combinations.
Supported in partVerified against the work's full text
Phillips defines epistasis as deviation from additive expectation across loci, which backs the additive-versus-interaction contrast; 'conjunctive'/AND-only expression is not his wording.
“epistasis means that something different happens when a particular set of alleles from different loci are in combination than when apart.”
- In genetics, epistatic interactions express a phenotype only under the AND of specific genotype combinations across loci, the literature explicitly contrasting additive with conjunctive effects.
- Synergy and Antagonism
- Example: two independently beneficial alleles for pathogen resistance interact antagonistically in the field because carrying both reduces overall fitness due to immune system hyperactivation, the kind of negative-epistatic suppression Phillips (2008) catalogues as essential to the structure and evolution of genetic systems.
This sourceComprehensive review of positive and negative epistasis as gene-by-gene synergy and antagonism, including immune-related allelic conflicts and their consequences for fitness.
Supported in partVerified against the work's full text
Phillips defines positive and negative epistasis and reviews immune-gene interactions, but gives no example of two resistance alleles that cut fitness together.
“Positive epistasis means that the phenotype is higher than expected and negative epistasis means that the phenotype is lower than expected.”
- Example: two independently beneficial alleles for pathogen resistance interact antagonistically in the field because carrying both reduces overall fitness due to immune system hyperactivation, the kind of negative-epistatic suppression Phillips (2008) catalogues as essential to the structure and evolution of genetic systems.
Domain-specific¶
- Latent-Path Activation
- It is the race condition in concurrency (a latent interleaving that produces corruption only when several timing conditions coincide); the epistatic gene–gene–environment interaction in genetics (disease expressed only under a conjunction of variants and exposures, none pathogenic alone); the drug–drug interaction in pharmacology and toxicology, where the literature even reuses the word "latent pathway" for the same conjunctive-activation shape
This sourceThe genetics co-instance only — epistasis as a phenotype produced by a conjunction of gene variants, none of which acts alone; the review treats gene-gene interaction and does not extend to environmental exposures, to concurrency, or to pharmacology.
Supported in partVerified against the source
- It is the race condition in concurrency (a latent interleaving that produces corruption only when several timing conditions coincide); the epistatic gene–gene–environment interaction in genetics (disease expressed only under a conjunction of variants and exposures, none pathogenic alone); the drug–drug interaction in pharmacology and toxicology, where the literature even reuses the word "latent pathway" for the same conjunctive-activation shape
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 3 of 3 citations: 3 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:f0cd8b9098c4 · see in the full table