Dopaminergic gene methylation is associated with cognitive performance in a childhood monozygotic twin study

References

• Moreira HS, Costa AS, Castro SL, et al. Assessing executive dysfunction in neurodegenerative disorders: a critical review of brief neuropsychological tools. Front Aging Neurosci. 2017;9:369.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hosenbocus S, Chahal R. A review of executive function deficits and pharmacological management in children and adolescents. J Can Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2012;21:223.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Missale C, Nash SR, Robinson SW, et al. Dopamine receptors: from structure to function. Physiol Rev. 1998;78:189–225.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bannon MJ, Roth RH. Pharmacology of mesocortical dopamine neurons. Pharmacol Rev. 1983;35:53–68.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vijayraghavan S, Major AJ, Everling S. Neuromodulation of prefrontal cortex in non-human primates by dopaminergic receptors during rule-guided flexible behavior and cognitive control. Front Neural Circuits. 2017;11:91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bombin I, Arango C, Mayoral M, et al. DRD3, but not COMT or DRD2, genotype affects executive functions in healthy and first-episode psychosis adolescents. Am J Med Genet Part B Neuropsychiatr Genet. 2008;147:873–879.
   Google Scholar
• Hui L, Zhang X, Yu YQ, et al. Association between DBH 19bp insertion/deletion polymorphism and cognition in first-episode schizophrenic patients. Schizophr Res. 2013;147:236–240.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Togsverd M, Werge TM, Tankó L, et al. Cognitive performance in elderly women: significance of the 19bp insertion/deletion polymorphism in the 5′ flank of the dopamine beta-hydroxylase gene, educational level, body fat measures, serum triglyceride, alcohol consumption and age. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2007;22:883–889.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haworth CMA, Wright MJ, Luciano M, et al. The heritability of general cognitive ability increases linearly from childhood to young adulthood. Mol Psychiatry. 2010;15:1112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voelker P, Rothbart MK, Posner MK. A polymorphism related to methylation influences attention during performance of speeded skills. AIMS Neurosci. 2016;3:40–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parasuraman R, Greenwood PM, Kumar R, et al. Beyond heritability: neurotransmitter genes differentially modulate visuospatial attention and working memory. Psychol Sci. 2005;16:200–207.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diamond A, Briand L, Fossella J, et al. Genetic and neurochemicl modulation of prefrontal cognitive functions in children. Am J Psychiatry. 2004;161:125–132.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertolino A, Rubino V, Sambataro F, et al. Prefrontal-hippocampal coupling during memory processing is modulated by comt val158met genotype. Biol Psychiatry. 2006;60:1250–1258.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rueda MR, Rueda MR, Rothbart MK, et al. Training, maturation, and genetic influences on the development of executive attention. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005;102:14931–14936.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghanemi A. Targeting G protein coupled receptor-related pathways as emerging molecular therapies. Saudi Pharm J. 2015;23:115–129.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szekeres G, Kéri S, Juhász A, et al. Role of dopamine d3 receptor (DRD3) and dopamine transporter (DAT) polymorphism in cognitive dysfunctions and therapeutic response to atypical antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia. Am J Med Genet Neuropsychiatr Genet. 2004;124:B:1–5.
   Google Scholar
• Fan J, Fossella J, Sommer T, et al. Mapping the genetic variation of executive attention onto brain activity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100:7406–7411.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao L, Lin Y, Lao G, et al. Association study of dopamine receptor genes polymorphism with cognitive functions in bipolar i disorder patients. J Affect Disord. 2015;170:85–90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yue JK, Winkler EA, Rick JW, et al. DRD2 C957T polymorphism is associated with improved 6-month verbal learning following traumatic brain injury. Neurogenetics. 2017;18:29–38.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Takahashi H, Yamada M, Suhara T. Functional significance of central D1 receptors in cognition: beyond working memory. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2012;32:1248–1258.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Holstein M, Aarts E, van der Schaaf ME, et al. Human cognitive flexibility depends on dopamine D2 receptor signaling. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2011;218:567–578.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nakajima S, Gerretsen P, Takeuchi H, et al. The potential role of dopamine D3 receptor neurotransmission in cognition. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2013;23:799–813.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Furth KE, Mastwal S, Wang KH, et al. Dopamine, cognitive function, and gamma oscillations: role of D4 receptors. Front Cell Neurosci. 2013;7:102.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asbury K, Plomin R. G is for genes: the impact of genetics on education and achievement. 2013;24.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson W, McGue M, Gaist D, et al. Frequency and heritability of depression symptomatology in the second half of life: evidence from danish twins over 45. Psychol Med. 2002;32:1175–1185.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colvert E, Tick B, McEwen F, et al. Heritability of autism spectrum disorder in a UK population-based twin sample. JAMA Psychiatry. 2015;72:415–423.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gatz M, Reynolds CA, Fratiglioni L, et al. Role of genes and environments for explaining Alzheimer disease. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2006;63:168–174.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Day JJ, Sweatt JD. Epigenetic mechanisms in cognition. Neuron. 2011;70:813–829.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barter JD, Foster TC. Aging in the brain: new roles of epigenetics in cognitive decline. Neuroscientist. 2018;24:516–525.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weaver ICG, Diorio J, Seckl JR, et al. Early environmental regulation of hippocampal glucocorticoid receptor gene expression: characterization of intracellular mediators and potential genomic target sites. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2004;1024:182–212.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fan J, Wu Y, Fossella JA, et al. Assessing the heritability of attnetional networks. BioMed Cent Neurosci. 2001;2:14.
   Google Scholar
• Rueda MR, Fan J, McCandliss BD, et al. Development of attentional networks in childhood. Neuropsychologia. 2004;42:1029–1040.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaywitz BA, Shaywitz SE, Blachman B, et al. Development of left occipitotemporal systems for skilled reading in children after a phonologically-based intervention. Biol Psychiatry. 2004;55:926–933.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Temple E, Deutsch GK, Poldrack RA, et al. Neural deficits in children with dyslexia ameliorated by behavioral remediation: evidence from functional MRI. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2003;100:2860–2865.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huber E, Donnelly PM, Rokem A, et al. Rapid and widespread white matter plasticity during an intensive reading intervention. Nat Commun. 2018;9:2260.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morimoto Y, Ono S, Imamura A, et al. Deep sequencing reveals variations in somatic cell mosaic mutations between monozygotic twins with discordant psychiatric disease. Hum Genome Var. 2017;4:17032.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Beaver KM, Vaughn MG, Delisi M. Nonshared environmental effects on adulthood psychopathic personality traits: results from a monozygotic twin difference scores analysis. Psychiatr Q. 2013;84:381–393.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bell JT, Pai AA, Pickrell JK, et al. Dna methylation patterns associate with genetic and gene expression variation in hapmap cell lines. Genome Biol. 2011;12:10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eriksen BA, Eriksen CW. Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Percept Psychophys. 1974;16:143–149.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akshoomoff N, Newman E, Wk T, et al. The NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery: Results from a Large Normative Developmental Sample (PING). NIH Public Access. 2014;28:1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Lemery-Chalfant K, Clifford S, McDonald K, et al. Arizona twin project: a focus on early resilience. Twin Res Hum Genet. 2013;16:404–411.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mueller ST, Piper BJ. The psychology experiment building language (PEBL) and pebl test battery. J Neurosci Methods. 2014;222:250–259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stins J, Polderman J, Boomsma D, et al. Conditional accuracy in response interference tasks: evidence from the eriksen flanker task and the spatial conflict task. Adv Cogn Psychol. 2007;3:409–417.
   Google Scholar
• Aryee MJ, Jaffe AE, Corrada-Bravo H, et al. Minfi: a flexible and comprehensive bioconductor package for the analysis of infinium DNA methylation microarrays. Bioinformatics. 2014;30:1363–1369.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teschendorff AE, Breeze CE, Zheng SC, et al. A comparison of reference-based algorithms for correcting cell-type heterogeneity in epigenome-wide association studies. BMC Bioinformatics. 2017;18:105.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Houseman EA, Accomando WP, Koestler DC, et al. DNA methylation arrays as surrogate measures of cell mixture distribution. BMC Bioinformatics. 2012;13:86.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Du P, Zhang X, Huang CC, et al. Comparison of Beta-value and M-value methods for quantifying methylation levels by microarray analysis. BMC Bioinformatics. 2010;11:587.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vandierendonck A. A comparison of methods to combine speed and accuracy measures of performance: a rejoinder on the binning procedure. Behav Res Methods. 2017;49:653–673.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardner RA. Digits forward and digits backward as two separate tests: normative data on 1567 school children. J Clin Child Psychol. 1981;10:131–135.
   Google Scholar
• Buss KA, Dennis TA, Brooker RJ, et al. An ERP study of conflict monitoring in 4–8-year old children: associations with temperament. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2011;1:131–140.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pike A, Hetherington EM, Reiss D, et al. Using MZ differences in the search for nonshared environmental effects. J Child Psychol Psychiatry Allied Discip. 1996;36:695–704.
   Google Scholar
• Nieoullon A. Dopamine and the regulation of cognition and attention. Prog Neurobiol. 2002;67:53–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gogos JA, Morgan M, Luine V, et al. Catechol-O-methyltransferase-deficient mice exhibit sexually dimorphic changes in catecholamine levels and behavior. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 1998;95:9991–9996.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kieling C, Genro JP, Hutz MH, et al. The −1021 C/T DBH polymorphism is associated with neuropsychological performance among children and adolescents with ADHD. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet. 2008;147:485–490.
   Google Scholar
• Garcia-Garcia M, Barceló F, Clemente IC, et al. The role of the dopamine transporter DAT1 genotype on the neural correlates of cognitive flexibility. Eur J Neurosci. 2010;31:754–760.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cornish KM, Manly T, Savage R, et al. Association of the dopamine transporter (DAT1) 10/10-repeat genotype with ADHD symptoms and response inhibition in a general population sample. Mol Psychiatry. 2005;10:686–698.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Congdon E, Constable RT, Lesch KP, et al. Influence of SLC6A3 and COMT variation on neural activation during response inhibition. Biol Psychol. 2009;81:144–152.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stokes PRA, Rhodes RA, Grasby PM, et al. The effects of the COMT val108/158met polymorphism on bold activation during working memory, planning, and response inhibition: a role for the posterior cingulate cortex. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2011;36:763.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller J, Dreisbach G, Brocke B, et al. Dopamine and cognitive control: the influence of spontaneous eyeblink rate, DRD4 exon III polymorphism and gender on flexibility in set-shifting. Brain Res. 2007;1131:155–162.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Logue SF, Gould TJ. The neural and genetic basis of executive function: attention, cognitive flexibility, and response inhibition. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2014;123:45–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnes JJM, Dean AJ, Nandam LS, et al. The molecular genetics of executive function: role of monoamine system genes. Biol Psychiatry. 2011;69:e127–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herrmann MJ, Walter A, Schreppel T, et al. D4 receptor gene variation modulates activation of prefrontal cortex during working memory. Eur J Neurosci. 2007;26:2713–2718.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cowan N. Working memory maturation: can we get at the essence of cognitive growth? Perspect Psychol Sci. 2016;11:239–264.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Li D, Sham PC, Owen MJ, et al. Meta-analysis shows significant association between dopamine system genes and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Hum Mol Genet. 2006;15:2276–2284.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noble EP. Addiction and its reward process through polymorphisms of the D2dopamine receptor gene: a review. Eur Psychiatry. 2000;15:79–89.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robertson CL, Ishibashi K, Mandelkern MA, et al. Striatal D1- and D2-type dopamine receptors are linked to motor response inhibition in human subjects. J Neurosci. 2015;35:5990–5997.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grillner S, Hellgren J, Ménard A, et al. Mechanisms for selection of basic motor programs - roles for the striatum and pallidum. Trends Neurosci. 2005;28:364–370.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller CA, Jd S. Covalent modification of DNA regulates memory formation. Neuron. 2007;53:857–869.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudenko A, L-H T. Epigenetic regulation in memory and cognitive disorders. Neuroscience. 2013;264C:51–63.
   Google Scholar
• Yu NK, Baek SH, Kaang BK. DNA methylation-mediated control of learning and memory. Mol Brain. 2011;4:5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Starnawska A, Tan Q, McGue M, et al. Epigenome-wide association study of cognitive functioning in middle-aged monozygotic twins. Front Aging Neurosci. 2017;9:413.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boks MP, Derks EM, Weisenberger DJ, et al. The relationship of DNA methylation with age, gender and genotype in twins and healthy controls. PLoS One. 2009;4:21–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang D, Cheng L, Badner JA, et al. genetic control of individual differences in gene-specific methylation in human brain. Am J Hum Genet. 2010;86:411–419.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ursini G, Bollati V, Fazio L, et al. Stress-related methylation of the catechol-o-methyltransferase val158 allele predicts human prefrontal cognition and activity. J Neurosci. 2011;31:6692–6698.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dadds MR, Schollar-Root O, Lenroot R, et al. Epigenetic regulation of the DRD4 gene and dimensions of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2016;25:1081–1089.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleefstra T, Schenck A, Kramer JM, et al. The genetics of cognitive epigenetics. Neuropharmacology. 2014;80:83–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fraga MF, Ballestar E, Paz MF, et al. From the cover: epigenetic differences arise during the lifetime of monozygotic twins. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2005;102:10604–10609.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith AK, Kilaru V, Klengel T, et al. DNA extracted from saliva for methylation studies of psychiatric traits: evidence tissue specificity and relatedness to brain. Am J Med Genet Part B Neuropsychiatr Genet. 2015;168:36–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lowe R, Gemma C, Beyan H, et al. Buccals are likely to be a more informative surrogate tissue than blood for epigenome-wide association studies. Epigenetics. 2013;8:445–454.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar