The Epigenetics Revolution

These experiments suggested that certain epigenetic proteins act as a kind of dampening field. ‘Naked’ DNA is rather prone to being switched on somewhat randomly, and the overall effect is like having a lot of background chatter in our cells. This is called transcriptional noise. The epigenetic proteins act to turn down the volume of this random chat. They do this by covering the histones with modifications that reduce the genes’ expression. It’s likely that different epigenetic proteins are important for suppressing different genes in some tissues rather than in others.

It’s clear that this suppression isn’t total. If it were, then all inbred mice would be identical in every aspect of their phenotype and we know this isn’t the case. There is variation in body weight even in the inbred strains, it’s just that there’s even more variation in the mice with the depressed levels of the epigenetic proteins.

This sophisticated balancing act, in which epigenetic proteins dampen down transcriptional noise but don’t entirely repress gene expression, is a cellular compromise. It leaves cells with enough flexibility of gene expression to be able to respond to new signals – be these hormones or nutrients, pollutants or sunlight – but without the genes being constantly ready to fire up just for the heck of it. Epigenetics allows cells to perform the difficult compromise between becoming (and remaining) different cell types with a variety of functions, and not being so locked into a single pattern of gene expression that they become incapable of responding to changes in their environment.

Something that is becoming increasingly clear is that early development is a key period when this control of transcriptional noise first becomes established. After all, very little of the variation in body weight in the original inbred strains could be attributed to the post-natal environment (just 20–30 per cent). Interest is increasing all the time in the role of a phenomenon called developmental programming, whereby events during foetal development can impact on the whole of adult life, and it is increasingly recognised that epigenetic mechanisms are what underlie a major proportion of this programming.

Such a model is entirely consistent with Emma Whitelaw’s work on the effects of decreased levels of Dnmt3a or Trim28 in her mouse studies. The body weight effects were apparent when the mice were just three weeks old. This model is also consistent with the fact that decreased levels of Dnmt3a resulted in the increased variability in body weight, but decreased levels of the related enzyme Dnmt1 had no effect in Emma Whitelaw’s experiments. Dnmt3a can add methyl groups to totally unmethylated DNA regions, which means it is responsible for establishing the correct DNA methylation patterns in cells. Dnmt1 is the protein that maintains pre-established methylation patterns on DNA. It seems that the most important feature for dampening down gene expression variability (at least as far as body weight is concerned) is establishing the correct DNA methylation patterns in the first place.

The Dutch Hunger Winter

Scientists and policy-makers have recognised for many years the importance of good maternal health and nutrition during pregnancy, to increase the chances that babies will be born at a healthy weight and so be more likely to thrive physically. In more recent years, it’s become increasingly clear that if a mother is malnourished during pregnancy, her child may be at increased risk of ill-health, not just during the immediate post-birth infancy, but for decades. We’ve only recently begun to realise that this is at least in part due to molecular epigenetic effects, which result in impaired developmental programming and life-long defects in gene expression and cellular function.

As already highlighted, there are extremely powerful ethical and logistical reasons why humans are a difficult species to use experimentally. Tragically, historical events, terrible at the time, conspire to create human scientific study groups by accident. One of the most famous examples of this is the Dutch Hunger Winter, which was mentioned in the Introduction.

This was a period of terrible hardship and near-starvation during the Nazi fuel and food blockade of the Netherlands in the last winter of the Second World War. Twenty-two thousand people died and the desperate population ate anything they could find, from tulip bulbs to animal blood. The dreadful privations of the population created a remarkable scientific study population. The Dutch survivors were a well-defined group of individuals all of whom suffered just one period of malnutrition, all of them at exactly the same time.