MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412492838 · doi:10.1016/j.gde.2025.102381

Why and how paternal mitochondrial DNA gets cut out of the inheritance

2025· review· en· W4412492838 on OpenAlexafffund
Thomas R. Hurd

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Genetics & Development · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMitochondrial Function and Pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHeiwa Nakajima Foundation
KeywordsMitochondrial DNABiologyNon-Mendelian inheritanceInheritance (genetic algorithm)GeneticsEvolutionary biologyMechanism (biology)MitochondrionExtranuclear inheritanceGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is inherited maternally across animals, yet the evolutionary rationale behind this unusual mode of inheritance remains a longstanding mystery. Understanding the processes that prevent the transmission of paternal mtDNA and thus ensure maternal-only inheritance is crucial to uncovering the evolutionary significance of this widespread phenomenon. Historically, research has focused on mechanisms that act within eggs to destroy sperm mitochondria via autophagy and the ubiquitin-proteasome degradation system. However, recent discoveries across multiple animal species, including humans, reveal a surprising twist: paternal mtDNA is actively degraded within mitochondria independently of and prior to the complete breakdown of the organelle itself, often even prior to fertilization. Only a few studies have begun to illuminate the molecular machinery responsible for this early mtDNA elimination. In this review, we explore the emerging landscape of paternal mtDNA elimination mechanisms across species, highlighting newly discovered pathways, evolutionary implications, and open questions that are furthering our understanding of mitochondrial inheritance.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Genetics & DevelopmentSame topicMitochondrial Function and PathologyFrench-language works237,207