ScienceDNAidentical twinschild development

Identical Twins' Genes Research Suggests Siblings Are Genetically Different

Just How 'Identical' Are Identical Twins?
Open Image Modal
little newborn twins are...

By: Tia Ghose, LiveScience Staff Writer
Published: 11/10/2012 11:11 AM EST on LiveScience

SAN FRANCISCO – Identical twins may not be so identical after all. Even though identical twins supposedly share all of their DNA, they acquire hundreds of genetic changes early in development that could set them on different paths, according to new research.

The findings, presented Friday (Nov. 9) here at the American Society of Human Genetics meeting, may partly explain why one twin gets cancer while another stays healthy. The study also suggests that these genetic changes are surprisingly common.

"It's not as rare as people previously expected," said study presenter Rui Li, an epidemiologist at McGill University.

While past studies have looked at genetic changes, or mutations, in sperm and eggs, which can be passed on to offspring, very few studies have looked at somatic mutations. These mutations, also called copy errors, can occur early in fetal development, but because they aren't in the sex cells (the X or Y chromosomes) of the fetus, they can't be passed on.

Other studies have shown that chemical modifications, or epigenetic effects, can change which genes are expressed over the years, one factor that renders twins not completely identical. Still, other work has shown that identical twins can have different gene mutations, but this study didn't determine how often they occur.

To find out how often these mutations occur in early development, Li and her colleagues studied the genomes of 92 pairs of identical twins and searched hundreds of thousands of sites in their genomes for differences between twins in base pairs, which are represented by letters that make up DNA. For instance, one twin may carry an A at one point while another carries a C. The researchers could only detect differences that would occur very early in fetal development and would show up in most cells in the body.

They then calculated the frequency with which these mutations occurred. Only two sets of twins had such mutations, which translates to a DNA change occurring once for every 10 million to 10 billion bases that are copied every time a cell divides. While that may seem like a high accuracy rate, cells in the body divide trillions of times. So that would mean an average twin pair carries 359 genetic differences that occurred early in development.

One limitation of the study is that they could only estimate the mutation rate based on blood cells, but some cells in the body divide much more frequently and so may rack up many more mutations. Other cells, like brain cells, don't regenerate much and would probably remain stable.

"Our DNA samples came from blood samples," Li told LiveScience. "You need to define different rates in different tissues."

Follow LiveScience on Twitter @livescience. We're also on Facebook & Google+.

Copyright 2012 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Our 2024 Coverage Needs You

As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.

Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.

to keep our news free for all.

Support HuffPost

Before You Go

Bizarre Genetic Engineering
Pollution-fighting plants(01 of05)
Open Image Modal
Scientists at the University of Washington are engineering poplar trees that can clean up contamination sites by absorbing groundwater pollutants through their roots. The plants then break the pollutants down into harmless byproducts that are incorporated into their roots, stems and leaves or released into the air. In laboratory tests, the transgenic plants are able to remove as much as 91 percent of trichloroethylene — the most common groundwater contaminant at U.S. Superfund sites — out of a liquid solution. Regular poplar plants removed just 3 percent of the contaminant. (credit:University of Washington)
Venomous cabbage(02 of05)
Open Image Modal
Scientists have recently taken the gene that programs poison in scorpion tails and combined it with cabbage. Why would they want to create venomous cabbage? To limit pesticide use while still preventing caterpillars from damaging cabbage crops. These genetically modified cabbages produce scorpion poison that kills caterpillars when they bite leaves — but the toxin is modified so it isn’t harmful to humans. (credit:File/Flickr:net_efekt)
Web-spinning goats(03 of05)
Open Image Modal
Strong, flexible spider silk is one of the most valuable materials in nature, and it could be used to make an array of products — from artificial ligaments to parachute cords — if we could just produce it on a commercial scale. In 2000, Nexia Biotechnologies announced it had the answer: a goat that produced spiders’ web protein in its milk. Researchers inserted a spiders’ dragline silk gene into the goats’ DNA in such a way that the goats would make the silk protein only in their milk. This “silk milk” could then be used to manufacture a web-like material called Biosteel. (credit:File/Flickr:maessive)
Flavr Savr tomato(04 of05)
Open Image Modal
The Flavr Savr tomato was the first commercially grown genetically engineered food to be granted a license for human consumption. By adding an antisense gene, the California-based company Calgene hoped to slow the ripening process of the tomato to prevent softening and rotting, while allowing the tomato to retain its natural flavor and color. The FDA approved the Flavr Savr in 1994; however, the tomatoes were so delicate that they were difficult to transport, and they were off the market by 1997. On top of production and shipping problems, the tomatoes were also reported to have a very bland taste: “The Flavr Savr tomatoes didn’t taste that good because of the variety from which they were developed. There was very little flavor to save,” said Christ Watkins, a horticulture professor at Cornell University. (credit:File/Flickr: Mr. T in DC)
(05 of05)
Open Image Modal
CLICK HERE to continue on to Mother Nature Network to see the rest of these bizarre genetically engineered creations, including banana vaccines, less-flatulent cows, medicinal eggs and more!
Suggest a correction
|
Submit a tip