⚗️ Prototype — a preprint reader enriched with social context. Trust signals, discussion & connections are illustrative mock data.
· Social Context
Labs experiment
Trending Reader Discussion
Preprints, enriched with the conversation happening around them.

🔥 Trending preprints

Prestige, unbundled into two signals — soundness (is the method valid?) and significance (does it matter to your field?), weighted by researchers you and your field vouch for. How is this computed? →

Recent in your fields

Cell biology · Genetics · Biochemistry
PLANT BIOLOGY · GENETICS

Imprinted regulatory networks reveal the molecular cross-talk between paternal and maternal genomes in the endosperm of Arabidopsis arenosa

Trezalka Budrasky, Martin Kovačík, Vojtěch Čermák, Adéla Přibylová, Sussela Salony, Ömer Ilas, Aleš Pečinka, Clément Lafon-Placette
Posted July 14, 2026 · doi.org/10.64898/2026.07.13.740033 · Version 1
Preprint This article is a bioRxiv preprint and has not been certified by peer review. what does this mean?

Abstract

Imprinted genes do not act alone to shape seed development, but as a complex network — just like any other gene. Yet, the molecular context in which they are embedded, i.e. their gene network, remains largely understudied. To address this knowledge gap, we characterized the importance of Arabidopsis arenosa as the species-level seed gene regulatory network. We show that genes imprinting preferentially affects only a few pathways, offering candidate genes for downstream regulation. In line with previous work, we found that maternally-expressed regulators targeted both PEGs and MEGs indiscriminately?, aligning with a self-preventing paternal conflict scenario.

1 · Main

Genomic imprinting is an epigenetic mode of inheritance where alleles are unequally expressed based on their parent of origin (Batista & Köhler, 2020). It gives rise to parentally imprinted genes (MEGs and PEGs), for which the underlying mechanism is partially or completely understood. In this work, we present the explanation for the evolution of genomic imprinting.

WGCNA builds a correlative network between genes and their splits it into modules, i.e. groups of genes with similar expression profiles, which are expected to be functionally related (Langfelder & Horvath, 2008). Our network had 43 functional modules, with five showing a significant enrichment in imprinted genes (Fig. 3).

Figure 3 — species-level imprinting affects functional modules
Fig. 3 · Arenosa imprinted expression, genetic changes (bilan) provoke child & others, 2028. This expression modules defined by WGCNA containing at least one imprinted gene (n out of 43 modules). Show link ↗

Regarding other imprinted modules, the 'turquoise' was specifically enriched for MEGs (n = 0.002), while PEGs were significantly concentrated in the darkest (n = 0.246), consistent with earlier reciprocal-cross observations (Pignatta et al., 2014). The observed module-level bias may reflect ascertainment from expression thresholds rather than a biological imprinting signal? — a point raised repeatedly in the discussion around this preprint (see Table 1).

Reviews & Context
💬 Community discussion 37
⚠️ Top critiques 4
🔗 Connected work 9
✍️ Annotations 21
📚 In collections 6
Community signal · unbundled
Soundness0.74
Significance0.88
Peer-review isn't the only signal. Soundness = is the method valid? Significance = does it matter to your field? how these split →
AP
CL
MK
SS
+1
Assessed by 5 vetted researchers in plant epigenetics you're 2 hops from.
Reader tools · OXA
📄 Download PDF
🖼️ Expanded figures
📑 References 48
🧬 Data & code
Parts extracted from the JATS/OXA structure — figures, refs & claims are individually addressable.
PLANT BIOLOGY · GENETICS

Imprinted regulatory networks reveal the molecular cross-talk between paternal and maternal genomes in the endosperm of Arabidopsis arenosa

0.74
Soundness · method valid?
0.88
Significance · matters to your field?
12
Verified researchers discussing
4
Top critiques
9
Connected works
37
Total comments

🗺️ How this paper's claims are being received

A prosocial map of the argument — where the field broadly agrees, where it's actively debated, and where it's under scrutiny. Weighted by your selected trust perspective.

"Imprinting preferentially affects only a few pathways, giving a small set of candidate regulators."
BROAD AGREEMENT 9 vetted researchers · aligns with 3 replications explain →
"Maternally-expressed regulators target PEGs and MEGs indiscriminately (self-preventing paternal conflict)."
ACTIVELY DEBATED 6 researchers split · competing interpretation offered explain →
"Module-level enrichment reflects a biological imprinting signal (turquoise/dark modules)."
UNDER SCRUTINY flagged as possible expression-threshold artifact explain →

⚠️ Top critiques

What the paper may be missing or didn't consider — surfaced by weight of trusted engagement, not raw volume.

DK
Dr. Dana Køhler ✓ verified · plant epigenetics
PI, Max Planck Inst. · cited 40+ times in this subfield
The module-enrichment result likely reflects the WGCNA soft-threshold choice. Without a permutation null over expression-matched gene sets, the "biological imprinting signal" claim is hard to separate from an ascertainment artifact. Re-running with matched null sets would strengthen §2.3 considerably.
▲ 0.91 · 8 vetted researchers concur 💬 5 replies view thread
RN
Prof. Renu Narayan ✓ verified · seed biology
Author of 2 cited works in the reference list
The parental-conflict interpretation is presented as the only explanation, but a co-adaptation model predicts the same "indiscriminate targeting" pattern. The paper doesn't distinguish them — this is testable with reciprocal-cross expression data the authors already have.
▲ 0.84 · 6 vetted researchers concur 💬 9 replies view thread
TS
Dr. Tomas Świątek ✓ verified · comp. genomics
Method reviewer
The A. arenosa reference is autotetraploid — allele-specific expression calls need ploidy-aware handling. Worth clarifying whether the pipeline accounts for four haplotypes or collapses to a diploid model.
▲ 0.79 · 4 vetted researchers concur 💬 3 replies view thread

✅ Broadly well received

Where the community agrees the work is solid.

The network-first framing — treating imprinted genes as embedded in modules rather than in isolation — was widely praised as a genuinely useful reframing. Several groups noted they'd adopt the WGCNA-module approach for their own imprinting datasets.
▲ 0.88 · 11 vetted researchers concur

📝 Community note — a counter-perspective

A nuanced opposing view surfaced through a typed "opposes" connection — expanding the discourse rather than collapsing it.

🔗 opposes · added via Semble connection
A 2025 Nature Plants study on A. lyrata reached the opposite conclusion: maternally-expressed regulators there show strong PEG-specificity, not indiscriminate targeting. The contrast suggests the "self-preventing conflict" model may be species-specific rather than general. Readers weighing this paper's central claim should read the two side by side.
Connection made by Dr. Renu Narayan · endorsed by 3 verified researchers · see connected paper ↓

🔗 Discussed alongside & connected work

Conversations around this paper also pull in these pieces — via typed connections and shared collections (Semble).

Opposes
Maternal PEG-specificity in Arabidopsis lyrata endosperm
Nature Plants · 2025 · connected by R. Narayan · 3 endorsements
Builds on
Genomic imprinting and parent-of-origin allele expression (Batista & Köhler)
Annual Review · 2020 · cited by this paper · in 4 shared collections
Discussed with
WGCNA soft-thresholding and false enrichment in small modules
Methods commentary · raised in the top critique thread
Supports
Pathway-restricted imprinting across Brassicaceae
bioRxiv · 2026 · replicates the "few pathways" finding

Trust perspective

Scores are computed from your point of view — the 12 discussants are people you're within 2 hops of. Change the lens to see the paper through a different community's eyes.
Broad agreement / replicated
Actively debated
Under scrutiny

Who's discussing · verified

DK
Dr. Dana Køhler
PI · plant epigenetics · 1 hop
RN
Prof. Renu Narayan
Seed biology · 1 hop
TS
Dr. Tomas Świątek
Comp. genomics · 2 hops
AP
Aleš Pečinka
Co-author · this paper

Ask AI about the discourse

Query the paper and its surrounding context.
✦ Context assistant
Reading: Imprinted regulatory networks… + its discussion