Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T09:21:30.226Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Behavioral epigenetics and the developmental origins of child mental health disorders

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 July 2012

B. M. Lester*
Affiliation:
Brown Center for the Study of Children at Risk at Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA Department of Pediatrics, Warren Alpen Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA Department of Pediatrics, Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island, Providence, RI, USA
C. J. Marsit
Affiliation:
Departments of Pharmacology & Toxicology and Community & Family Medicine, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH, USA
E. Conradt
Affiliation:
Brown Center for the Study of Children at Risk at Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA Department of Pediatrics, Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island, Providence, RI, USA
C. Bromer
Affiliation:
Department of Neuroscience, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
J. F. Padbury
Affiliation:
Department of Pediatrics, Warren Alpen Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA Department of Pediatrics, Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island, Providence, RI, USA
*
*Address for correspondence: Dr B. Lester, Department of Pediatrics, Brown Center for Children, Women and Infants Hospital, 101 Dudley Street, Providence, RI, 02905 USA. (E-mails blester@wihri.org
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Advances in understanding the molecular basis of behavior through epigenetic mechanisms could help explain the developmental origins of child mental health disorders. However, the application of epigenetic principles to the study of human behavior is a relatively new endeavor. In this paper we discuss the ‘Developmental Origins of Health and Disease’ including the role of fetal programming. We then review epigenetic principles related to fetal programming and the recent application of epigenetics to behavior. We focus on the neuroendocrine system and develop a simple heuristic stress-related model to illustrate how epigenetic changes in placental genes could predispose the infant to neurobehavioral profiles that interact with postnatal environmental factors potentially leading to mental health disorders. We then discuss from an ‘Evo-Devo’ perspective how some of these behaviors could also be adaptive. We suggest how elucidation of these mechanisms can help to better define risk and protective factors and populations at risk.

Type
Review
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and the International Society for Developmental Origins of Health and Disease 2012 

Introduction

Advances in understanding the molecular basis of behavior through epigenetic mechanisms could help explain the developmental origins of child mental health disorders. However, the application of epigenetic principles to the study of human behavior is a relatively new endeavor. In this paper we summarize what is now known as the ‘Developmental Origins of Health and Disease’ (DOHaD) including the role of fetal programming. We then review epigenetic principles and their recent applications to behavior. Much of the work in DOHaD has involved the neuroendocrine system and this is another area connecting DOHaD with epigenetics. We too focus on the neuroendocrine system and develop a simple heuristic stress-related model to illustrate how epigenetic changes in placental genes could predispose the infant to neurobehavioral profiles that interact with postnatal environmental factors potentially leading to mental health disorders. We then discuss from an ‘Evo-Devo’ perspective how some of these behaviors could also be adaptive. Elucidation of these mechanisms can help to better define risk and protective factors and populations at risk.

DOHaD

It is now well established in preclinical, prospective clinical and epidemiological studies that early development can have echoes across the lifetime.Reference Barker, Osmond, Rodin, Fall and Winter1Reference Welberg and Seckl3 Early work showed that measures of birth size was related to adult risk of coronary heart disease and other metabolic syndromes including hypertension, stroke, insulin resistance, type 2 diabetes and dyslipidemia.Reference Barker and Osmond4Reference Barker6 The relationship between impaired fetal growth and an increased incidence of cardiovascular disease, hypertension and type 2 diabetes were especially strong in those who became obese in adolescence or adulthood. The disease burden is increased when there is a ‘mismatch’ between the prenatal and postnatal environments.Reference Gluckman and Hanson7

The literature on the influence of prenatal stress on offspring suggests that many biological factors acting during prenatal life are associated not only with the development of common adult cardiovascular and metabolicReference Barker8Reference Stein, Fall and Kumaran16 disorders but also with neurobehavioral and behavioral disorders.Reference Allin, Rooney and Cuddy17Reference Wals, Reichart and Hillegers20 Low birth weight is related to mental illness including schizophrenia,Reference Cannon and Rosso21 depressionReference Gale and Martyn18, Reference Thompson, Syddall, Rodin, Osmond and Barker19, Reference Alati, Lawlor and Mamun22 and psychological distress.Reference Cheung23Reference Schlotz and Phillips26 However, it is generally accepted that birth size is not at the heart of these disorders, but rather this phenotype acts as a proxy for the quality of the intrauterine environment, which itself reflects factors critical not only to fetal growth but also to adult health.Reference Welberg and Seckl3 Conversely, adverse events can affect the fetus and have long-term consequences without affecting birth size. Pregnant women undernourished during famine gave birth to normal-sized infants who, in a nutritionally adequate environment, later became obese.Reference Ravelli, van Der Meulen, Osmond, Barker and Bleker27, Reference Ravelli, Stein and Susser28

These observations on ‘developmental origins’ are due, in part, to environmental factors acting early in fetal life, with effects on developing systems that alter structure and function, and likely behavioral expression. These effects are possible because developmental plasticity enables the organism to change or reprogram structure and function in response to environmental cues. The adaptive significance is that plasticity enables a range of phenotypes to develop from a single genotype depending on environmental factors. The biological purpose of this fetal programming is to alter the set points or ‘hard-wire’ physiological systems to prepare the fetus for optimal adaptation to the postnatal environment. Undernutrition that reduces birth size may be one of many environmental factors that serve as a prenatal signal that reprograms the fetus. For example, programming that hardwires the fetal neuroendocrine system to cope with stress could result in altered behavior patterns consistent with elevated stress hormones.

These adaptations resulting from fetal programming to ‘prepare’ for the postnatal environment could be because of epigenetic mechanisms and, further, epigenetic mechanisms could be a factor in the later development of mental health disorders. However, the application of epigenetics to the study of behavior, especially human behavior, is relatively recent. In this article we summarize basic epigenetic principles followed by a description of this new field of behavioral epigenetics. An exhaustive review of all possible epigenetic processes impacting child mental health is beyond the scope of this paper. Thus, we will describe one of many possible epigenetic pathways involving the neuroendocrine system, which could lead to the later development of mental health disorders. Our goal is heuristic, intended to stimulate thinking about this general approach and other possible approaches. For example, although there has been discussion of the fetal/developmental origins of mental health disorders including fetal programming and epigenetics,Reference Schlotz and Phillips26, Reference Van Ijzendoorn, Bakermans-Kranenburg and Ebstein29, Reference Van den Bergh30 the description of specific pathways as described here is novel.

Epigenetic mechanisms

The term ‘epigenetics’ was introduced by Waddington in 1940Reference Waddington31 as ‘the interactions of genes with their environment, by which the genotype gives rise to phenotype and brings the phenotype into being’, or ways in which the developmental environment can influence the mature phenotype.Reference Van Speybroeck32 Although debate about the definition of epigenetics continues,Reference Bird33 it is probably safe to describe epigenetics as the inheritance of information based on gene expression control rather than on gene sequence. Epigenetic modifications lead to heritable, yet environmentally susceptible changes in gene expression without altering DNA sequences. This change in gene expression involves acquired, enzymatically catalyzed, covalent modification in DNA or chromatin-associated proteins. Although there are others, the classical and most studied epigenetic mechanisms are DNA cytosine methylation or post-translational modifications to histone proteins involved in chromatin formation.34Reference Lillycrop, Phillips, Jackson, Hanson and Burdge36 Briefly, DNA methylation involves the addition of a methyl group to individual cytosines in the context of CpG dinucleotides, the majority of which exist as ‘islands’, or regions of DNA with an over-representation of CpGs. Particularly when occurring in gene promoters, this is most often associated with transcriptional gene silencing; in other words, turning off the anticipated activity of the gene. Histones are the proteins in chromatin, which make up the core of the nucleosome, and that enable the DNA to be tightly packed in the cell's nucleus. Protruding from the core nucleosome are tails of these histones that can undergo post-translational modification of specific amino acid residues, including methylation, acetylation, phosphorylation, ubiquitylation and sumoylation. These modifications, in turn, can act as signals to enable or restrict access of regulatory transcription factors to the DNA, altering faithful gene transcription and increasing or decreasing gene expression. However, nucleosomes turn over relatively rapidly and in the absence of DNA replication.Reference Deal, Henikoff and Henikoff37 Thus, these alterations can allow for a dynamic control of gene expression, more so than that controlled by DNA methylation, which is thought to require DNA replication to remove the methylation marks.

We will argue that fetal programming, operating through epigenetic mechanisms, is altered by the intrauterine environment and could explain some of the origins of mental health disorders. Said another way, ‘while genes load the gun, epigenetics pulls the trigger’. Defining the molecular basis of fetal programming sets the stage for the developmental origins of both child mental health and psychiatric disorders but also requires the application of epigenetics to the study of human behavior.

Behavioral epigenetics

There are thousands of studies of epigenetics that have been conducted over the last 40 years; however, the application of epigenetics to the study of behavior is just beginning.Reference Van Ijzendoorn, Bakermans-Kranenburg and Ebstein29, Reference Lester, Tronick and Nestler38 Lester et al.Reference Lester, Tronick and Nestler38 described this new ‘discipline’ of behavioral epigenetics as the application of the principles of epigenetics to the study of physiologic, genetic, environmental and developmental mechanisms of behavior in human and non-human animals. It typically investigates at the level of chemical changes, gene expression and biological processes that underlie normal and abnormal behavior. This includes how behavior affects and is affected by epigenetic processes. It is interdisciplinary in its approach and draws on sciences such as neuroscience, psychology and psychiatry, genetics, biochemistry and psychopharmacology.

Lester et al.Reference Lester, Tronick and Nestler38 conducted a citation search (ISI Web of Knowledge: Science Citation Index) of published articles using the terms ‘epigenetics’, ‘epigenetics and disease’ and ‘epigenetics and behavior’ through June 2011 (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1 Epigenetic citations by search terms. Citation search for epigenetic articles by year of publication. The number of published articles using the terms ‘epigenetics’, ‘epigenetics and disease’ and ‘epigenetics and behavior’ indicating the recent emergence of the field of behavioral epigenetics.

In contrast to the many citations for ‘epigenetics’, there are far fewer citations for ‘epigenetics and disease’ and few citations for ‘epigenetics and behavior’ (mostly non-human). Using PubMed we identified 178 studies that fit the above description of behavioral epigenetics and grouped the articles into nine categories based on the major construct that was studied. The most studied areas are psychiatric illness (depression, schizophrenia, suicide and bipolar disorder) and substance use (mostly alcohol, cocaine and tobacco). Other areas include learning and memory (memory formation, consolidation, enhancement extinction learning); neurodevelopment (disorders such as Autism, Rett, Prader–Willi and Angelman syndromes, studies of normal development and traumatic brain injury); parenting (maternal care, separation, depression and child abuse); stress [prenatal, hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) responsivity, stress reduction and hippocampal gene expression]; lifestyle (nutrition, exercise); neurodegenerative (disorders such as Alzheimer's, Huntington's) and sexual behavior (male). These are mostly preclinical studies using brain tissue. In human studies other specimens have been used including blood,Reference Oberlander, Weinberg and Papsdorf39 buccal epithelial cellsReference Essex, Thomas Boyce and Hertzman40 and in our own work, placenta.Reference Lester and Padbury41Reference Marsit, Lambertini and Maccani44 Epigenetic changes in placental genes enables us to study alterations in the neuroendocrine system related to infant behavior.

Role of the neuroendocrine system

There are few settings in which gene–environment interactions are more profound, critical windows are of a more narrow duration and the latency to onset of effect is shorter than the influence of an adverse intrauterine environment on neuroendocrine and neurobehavioral functioning in the newborn. Neuroendocrine physiology is unique during intrauterine life. Fetal neuroendocrine function is almost exclusively autonomous from that of the mother. There are robust placental mechanisms that create a barrier to passage of maternal hormones and neurotransmitters across the placenta. This includes all of the peptide hormones and releasing factors, all but a trace amount of thyroid hormones and catecholamines and ∼10% of the maternal glucocorticoids.Reference Gitau, Cameron, Fisk and Glover45, Reference Matthews46 Although this is a small amount it may be a lot in terms of fetal physiology. There is a very high endogenous secretion rate of catecholamines by the fetus that conditions its capacity for a huge increase in norepinephrine and epinephrine secretion at birth to facilitate postnatal adaptation.Reference Padbury and Martinez47 The fetus is protected from a hyperadrenergic state in utero by robust placental mechanisms for the uptake and degradation of catecholamines. These mechanisms, however, render the fetus exquisitely vulnerable to the effects of catecholamine uptake inhibitors such as cocaine and amphetamines or drugs that increase catecholamine secretion such as nicotine.

Adverse intrauterine exposures including drugs, hypoxia or nutritional stress lead to further increases in the release of fetal catecholamines (epinephrine, norepinephrine and dopamine) and glucocorticoids. These catecholamines in turn alter regulation of the neuroendocrine environment by acting on the HPA axis resulting in altered set points for physiologic, metabolic and behavioral outcomes.Reference Matthews48

The brain is particularly sensitive to prenatal programming including effects on the HPA axis (for review see MatthewsReference Matthews46). Because they are an important feature of the stress response, glucocorticoids have become prominent candidates for mediators of the effects of fetal programming and glucocorticoids can have a major impact on the developing brain.Reference Matthews46 There is evidence that maternal adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) modulates the developing fetal HPA axis.Reference Slone-Wilcoxon and Redei49 Pregnant dams and sows exposed to stress show increased ACTH and cortisol,Reference Welberg and Seckl3, Reference Slotkin, Orband-Miller, Queen, Whitmore and Seidler50, Reference Williams, Hennessy and Davis51 and their offspring exhibit increased cortisol and ACTH levels from the gestational period with exaggerated fear responses persisting in these offspring into adulthood.Reference Matthews48, Reference Haussmann, Carroll and Weesner52, Reference Griffin, Skinner, Salm and Birkle53 Pregnant women treated with a synthetic glucocorticoid, dexamethasone, are more likely to have infants who are more distractible and aggressive at age 3 and 6 years.Reference French, Hagan, Evans, Mullan and Newnham54 In addition, excess corticoids may be harmful because they are involved in catabolic activity and cell division in the fetal brain.Reference Lou, Hansen and Nordentoft55

One commonly studied proxy for increased exposure to maternal glucocorticoids includes the assessment of maternal antenatal anxiety. In human studies, maternal antenatal anxiety is associated with higher total distress score on a newborn exam, higher basal postnatal cortisol,Reference Rieger, Pirke and Buske-Kirschbaum56 increased postnatal crying and a difficult tempermament.Reference Van den Bergh57Reference Van den Bergh, Mulder, Mennesa and Glover59 Of relevance to our current model, maternal antenatal anxiety is also related to a high, flattened diurnal cortisol pattern, which, in females only, was significantly associated with greater depressive symptoms.Reference Van den Bergh, Van Calster, Smits, Van Huffel and Lagae60 These results persisted even after controlling for concurrent maternal anxiety. Thus, postnatal child HPA-axis functioning, which itself may have been programmed in-utero, may mediate the relation between exposure to maternal antenatal anxiety and expression of childhood psychopathology.Reference Schlotz and Phillips26 A flattened or blunted cortisol response has also been related to prenatal cocaine exposure,Reference Lester, Lagasse and Shankaran61, Reference Bauer, Lambert and Bann62 maternal substance use during pregnancy and foster care,Reference Fisher, Kim, Bruce and Pears63 suggesting similar perturbations of HPA-axis function in other populations at risk for mental health disorders.

The effects of prenatal stress on adult hippocampal corticosteroid receptor densityReference Gale and Martyn18, Reference Barbazanges, Piazza, Le Moal and Maccari64Reference Vallee, Mayo and Dellu68 may have implications for emotional reactivity. There is a rich literature relating prenatal stress to altered HPA activity and behavior in both animal and human research. Prenatally stressed rats have a high degree of ‘emotionality’Reference Fride, Dan, Feldon, Halevy and Weinstock69 reflected by decreased locomotion and increased defecation.Reference Pfister and Muir13, Reference Fride, Dan, Feldon, Halevy and Weinstock69Reference Wakshlak and Weinstock71 They also show less play,Reference Takahashi, Haglin and Kalin72 more defensive freezing,Reference Takahashi, Turner and Kalin73 less movement in an activity wheelReference Lambert, Kinsley and Jones74 and increased vocalizations.Reference Williams, Hennessy and Davis51 Prenatal stress affects their cognitive abilities including operant discrimination,Reference Weller, Glaubman, Yehuda, Caspy and Ben-Uria75 task competence in a water mazeReference Hayashi, Nagaoka and Yamada76, Reference Szuran, Zimmermann and Welzl77 and memory.Reference Vallee, MacCari and Dellu78 In other animal studies, maternal stress during pregnancy results in offspring that are more irritable, anxious and difficult to control.Reference Welberg and Seckl3, Reference Meaney and Seckl79Reference Schneider82

Brain neurotransmitter systems and glucocorticoids interact to modulate both behavior and HPA activity.Reference McEwen83 Disturbances in HPA regulation and brain monoamine levels have been associated with affective and anxiety disorders in humans.Reference Maes, Meltzer, D'Hondt, Cosyns and Blockx84Reference van Praag87 In human studies, poor health outcomes have been related to prenatal stress including low birth weight, preterm birth and intrauterine growth retardation.Reference Wadhwa, Garite and Porto88, Reference Wadhwa, Sandman and Garite89 Moderate to severely stressful life events during mid-gestation are related to low birth weight and small head circumference, suggesting a specific effect on the brain.Reference Lou, Hansen and Nordentoft55, Reference Kajantie and Raikkonen90 A recent review of the literature linking low birth weight to HPA reactivity suggested that low birth weight, as a proxy for the quality of the intrauterine environment, was associated with greater HPA reactivity in both childhood and adolescence.Reference Kajantie and Raikkonen90

In addition to an increased risk of excessive stress reactivity, cardiovascular and metabolic disease, an impaired prenatal environment also affects cognitive and behavioral development. Maternal first-trimester exposure to the stress of war has been associated with an increased risk of the offspring developing schizophrenia in adult life.Reference van Os and Selten91 Similar to the ‘emotionality’ reported in animal studies, human infants exposed to stress in utero show high reactivity, activity and irritability.Reference Field92Reference Levy-Shiff, Dimitrovsky, Shulman and Har-Even94 Psychological and behavioral abnormalities have been reported in children exposed to prenatal stressReference Meijer95Reference Ward97 including learning and behavior problemsReference DePietro98 and reduced hippocampal volume in both children and adults with histories of child abuse.Reference Bremner, Randall and Vermetten99 The effects of prolonged exposure to chronic stress or allostatic loadReference McEwen100 and, concomitantly, prolonged activation of the HPA axis have also been related to physical disease and behavioral disorders into adulthood.Reference McEwen101, Reference Felitti, Anda and Nordenberg102

A behavioral epigenetic developmental origins model of child mental health disorders

In previous work,Reference Lester and Padbury41 we described the effects of prenatal cocaine exposure as a potential stressor producing an adverse intrauterine environment on altered regulation of catecholamines and glucocorticoids. As a stressor, cocaine programs the HPA axis that controls, among other functions, the release of cortisol within the neuroendocrine system and mediates the stress response. This action impacts behavior due, in part, to plasticity of brain neurotransmitter monoamine systems. The cocaine exposure model is but one example of whole classes of stressors that impact and modifies these systems. We have integrated these concepts into a more generic model (Fig. 2) to illustrate how developmental origins could relate to child mental health disorders. Although there are many ways to relate developmental origins to child mental health, we highlight a pathway that involves alterations in the neuroendocrine system based on fetal programming and epigenetic modifications, and subsequent fit between the postnatal environment and infant behavior.

Fig. 2 Developmental Origins Model of child mental health disorders. The model illustrates one of many pathways in which prenatal environmental stressors could impact placental gene expression altering HPA set points and the infant's responsivity to postnatal environmental conditions affecting liability to mental health disorders. Epigenetic effects on key placental genes (shaded in a) increase fetal exposure to cortisol altering the abilities of the infant to respond to the postnatal environment which includes both parenting and broader environmental conditions. The ‘Goodness of Fit’ (b) or relative match or mismatch between the infant's capacities and the kind of parenting appropriate for the infant's capacities in the context of the degree of adversity of the broader postnatal environment will determine the probability of risk for mental health disorders. This risk is maximized when the infant has restricted behavioral capacities that clash (are a mismatch) with parenting styles in the context of environmental adversity (based on Gluckman and Hanson 2005).

The model shows the impact of an adverse intrauterine environment, which can encompass maternal stress, environmental exposures, nutrition or other adverse conditions, on placental gene expression affecting cortisol and altering the infant's neurobehavioral responsivity to postnatal environmental conditions affecting liability to mental health disorders. We have focused on several candidate genes involved in responsivity and control of the HPA axis in the placenta during gestation, including the norepinephrine transporter (NET), the steroid metabolic enzyme 11beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase-2 (11β-HSD-2) and the glucocorticoid receptor (GR; NR3C1).

Placental NET and 11β-HSD-2 are pivotal placental genes that program the intrauterine neuroendocrine environment during development. They protect the fetus from excess catecholamines and glucocorticoids, which have harmful effects on the fetus.Reference Meyer103 11β-HSD-2 in particular converts maternal cortisol to inert cortisone protecting the developing fetus from exposure to maternal cortisol.Reference Lopez Bernal and Craft104 Lower placental 11β-HSD-2 activity is associated with smaller fetuses in ratsReference Benediktsson, Lindsay, Noble, Seckl and Edwards105 and humans.Reference McTernan, Draper and Nicholson106Reference Stewart, Roberson and Mason109 Rat pups born to parents who did not express 11β-HSD-2, had significantly lower birth weights, and exhibited more anxiety compared with pups born to parents who expressed 11β-HSD-2.Reference Holmes, Abrahamsen and French110 Rare mutations of 11β-HSD-2 are also associated with low birth weight in human infantsReference Dave-Sharma, Wilson and Harbison111 and increased fetal cortisol levels are associated with intrauterine growth restriction.Reference Seckl, Cleasby and Nyirenda112 11β-HSD-2 modulates the programming effects of prenatal glucocorticoid exposure.Reference Edwards, Benediktsson, Lindsay and Seckl113, Reference Seckl114 The HPA axis is highly sensitive to the effects of glucocorticoids on perinatal programming.Reference Welberg and Seckl3, Reference Bohn115Reference Gould, Woolley and McEwen117 High levels of maternal glucocorticoids disrupt intrauterine growth, postnatal HPA-axis function and neurobehavioral outcome. We have shown that placental expression of this key enzyme is potently downregulated at the RNA, protein and functional level by norepinephrine, which is in turn regulated by NET.Reference Sarkar, Tsai, Nguyen, Plevyak and Padbury118 Downregulation of NET has been associated with an adverse intrauterine environment, maternal/placental disorders such as preeclampsia and exposure to drugs including cocaine and nicotine.Reference Bottalico, Larsson and Brodszki119, Reference Bzoskie, Yen and Tseng120 Reduced placental NET expression from cocaine exposure may lead to increased circulating catecholamines, downregulation of 11β-HSD-2 and chronic fetal hypercortisolism, leading to altered neuroendocrine (HPA axis) activity and dysregulated neurobehavior.

We suggest that the association of prenatal stress and altered fetal development is mediated by effects on 11β-HSD-2. As a result, altered HPA and neurobehavioral reactivity could predispose the child to the development of mental health disorders. Our preliminary findings show decreased 11β-HSD-2 expression in mothers who used cocaine, cigarettes or were depressed during pregnancy and that these changes in placental gene expression were associated with changes in the extent of methylation of placental genomic DNA, specifically within promoter regions, potentially suggesting an epigenetic mechanism responsible for this gene silencing following cocaine and/or nicotine exposure.Reference Lester and Padbury41 DNA methylation of the 11β-HSD-2 promoter has been linked to reduced expression of the gene,Reference Alikhani-Koopaei, Fouladkou, Frey and Frey121 has been associated with hypertension among individuals treated with glucocorticoidsReference Friso, Pizzolo and Choi122 and suggests that excess exposure to glucocorticoids could lead to reduced expression of this gene through DNA methylation. In addition, single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the 11β-HSD-2 promoter have been shown to alter transcription factor binding, leading to alterations in gene expression,Reference Alikhani-Koupaei, Fouladkou and Fustier123 which further indicates that accessibility of the promoter to transcription factors, mediated through chromatin changes, may be important in the control of expression of this enzyme. Factors that stress the intrauterine environment and trigger this cascade of events can reprogram the HPA axis and are considered risk factors specific to these prenatal effects.

The NR3C1 gene encodes the GR, a nuclear receptor that binds and is activated by cortisol leading to transcription of genes involved in functions related to cortisol stimulation, including stress responses, immune-modulation and energy metabolism.Reference Zanchi, Filho and Felitti124 In addition to its critical role in the cortisol signaling network, GR can also act as a regulator of itself, as well as of other genes in this pathway, including 11β-HSD-2. The promoter region of NR3C1, in addition to multiple copies of the GR-binding site, also contains binding sites of at least 15 different transcription factors. This allows for exquisite tissue-specific regulation and alterations of expression by different physiologic stimuli.Reference Yudt and Cidlowski125 The human placenta at term expresses a number of GR mRNA variants, and the level of expression of these variants is altered with the onset of labor and with cortisol exposure, suggesting that stressful events may control its expression.Reference Johnson, Rennie and Murphy126 Maternal care has been linked to alterations in methylation of the exon 1–7 promoter region of the NR3C1 gene in animal models.Reference Meaney and Szyf127Reference Liu, Diorio, Day, Francis and Meaney129 In human studies, third trimester stress was associated with increased methylation of the CpG3 site in exon 1F of the NR3C1 promoter (equivalent to the rat exon 1–7), which is thought to alter the binding of the NGF1-A binding site and thus altering GR expression.Reference Oberlander, Weinberg and Papsdorf39 Rat models have suggested dynamic patterns of expression of GR in late gestation, with near-term rats demonstrating elevated expression of GR in the labyrinth zone of the placenta, the site of maternal fetal exchange, associated with reduced expression of 11β-HSD-2 in this region at this same time.Reference Mark, Augustus, Lewis, Hewitt and Waddell130

Interestingly, nutrient restriction, in the ovine model, has been associated with decreased cell proliferation but increased GR expression in 66- and 110-day gestation placentas, coincident with the period of normal maximum placenta growth, and so is thought to be a compensatory adaptation to reduced nutrient availability.Reference Yiallourides, Sebert and Wilson131 Human infants born large for gestational age demonstrated, on average, increased methylation of the exon 1F region in human placenta tissues.Reference Filiberto, Maccani and Koestler132 Together, these data suggest that expression of the GR in placenta is regulated by the environment and that this regulation, in part, is mediated through epigenetic mechanisms.

In our model, an adverse intrauterine environment and/or prenatal stress alters expression of key placental genes increasing fetal exposure to cortisol and altering HPA set points, which in turn alter the capacity for neuroendocrine and neurobehavioral responses to the postnatal environment. These alterations can be elicited through epigenetic effects with key targets of epigenetic alterations shaded (Fig. 2a). In addition, these ‘acquired’ effects could be exacerbated in situations where there is already a genetic predisposition for a mental health disorder such that the added epigenetic effects increase the likelihood that the disorder will reach threshold and be expressed. A more sensitive genotype in the presence of epigenetically induced altered gene expression following prenatal stress puts the infant at greater risk for mental health disorders than a more resistant genotype with the same prenatal stress.

The cascade of epigenetic effects in utero and their impact on infant behavior shown in the figure has only recently been demonstrated. These studies use a newborn neurobehavioral assessment [NICU (Neonatal Intensive Care Unit) Network Neurobehavioral Scale or NNNS]Reference Lester and Tronick133 that predicts poorer performance on the 24-month Bayley Psychomotor Developmental Index and cerebral palsy at 2 years,Reference El-Dib, Massaro, Glass and Aly134, Reference Stephens, Liu and Lester135 as well as behavior problems, school readiness and IQ through $$--><$>4\tfrac{1}{2}$$$ years of age.Reference Liu, Bann and Lester136 Thus, epigenetic effects related to neurobehavioral findings on the NNNS could have implications for long-term developmental outcome, including mental health disorders. In a study of 185 healthy newborn infants, DNA methylation of the 11β-HSD-2 promoter region in the placenta was greatest in infants with the lowest birth weight and this increasing methylation was associated with poorer quality of movement on the NNNS.Reference Marsit, Maccani, Padbury and Lester42 We also studied the extent of DNA methylation of the NR3C1 promoter and a SNP in the promoter region of the NR3C1 gene in these infants.Reference Bromer, Marsit, Padbury and Lester43 NR3C1 methylation was associated with infant attention and quality of movement on the NNNS. There was also a potential interaction between methylation and genotype on attention suggesting that epigenetic alterations of genetically susceptible infants may further increase the risk of later mental health and developmental problems.

These studies demonstrate small, but significant independent associations between DNA methylation variation in these genes and newborn neurobehavioral effects. The magnitude of the effect likely underscored that it is, of course, unlikely that one or two altered genes or a single epigenetic × genotype interaction could explain complicated phenotypes such as newborn neurobehavior let alone later mental disorders. Likely, there is a coordinated interplay between epigenetic variation across numerous loci arising from the intrauterine environment, in concert with (or potentially influenced by) genetic variation in key pathways, which comprehensively dictates neurobehavior and mental health.

To examine such issues, novel approaches aimed at identifying patterns of coordinated molecular profiles based on genetic and/or epigenetic measures need to be employed. For example, we have utilized a recursively partitioned mixture modeling approachReference Houseman, Christensen and Yeh137 to examine the coordinated patterns of expression of epigenetically regulated imprinted genes in the placenta to identify the association between these profiles and neurobehavior on the NNNS.Reference Marsit, Lambertini and Maccani44 From these data on the expression of 22 imprinted genes, we identified four classes of gene expression for which each subject can be individually classified (Fig. 3). On the basis of these classifications, we demonstrated that infants with a class 4 profile compared with class 1 had a nearly 1 sd reduction in the NNNS quality of movement summary score, which measures motor control, smoothness and maturity.

Fig. 3 Heatmap showing four classes of expression signature of the 22 imprinted genes. Gaussian recursively partitioned mixture models, a hierarchical clustering, based on imprinted gene expression identifying 4 distinct classes of expression signature. Samples are in rows, and the expression of the 22 imprinted genes examined is shown by the heatmap in column. The dendrogram depicts the splitting of the samples into 4 classes, which are separated on the heat map by red lines and labeled classes 1, 2, 3 and 4

These data support the hypothesis that coordinated alterations in many genes may be particularly important for our understanding of neurobehavioral development, and suggest that analytical approaches that facilitate modeling these interactions will be critically important in delineating these relationships. Figure 2 provides a simple example, based on our earlier results on NET, NR3C1 and 11β-HSD-2 in which alterations of these three genes can modify the HPA axis, and the role that the intrauterine environment as well as genotype may play. As these networks grow in complexity, and as novel genes are introduced, the models will need to be expanded to include this novel information. We must also recognize that the genes that will be critical will not be limited to those with already described associations with behavioral or mental health disorders, but may expand to include a variety of other pathways, including those important in fetal development such as imprinted genes and even microRNAs.

The model (Fig. 2b) also shows how the larger (distal) postnatal environment can affect infant behavior altered by changing HPA set points. The postnatal environment can range from ‘normal’ (even enriched) to adverse including the ‘usual suspects’ such as poverty, low socioeconomic status, lack of education, poor quality of the home and neighborhood, race and ethnic status, community violence and others. The more immediate (proximal) postnatal environment includes parenting or ‘relationship’ factors. The infant develops in the context of the caregiving relationship,Reference Calkins and Hill138, Reference Cohn and Tronick139 and this relationship lays the foundation for effective methods of coping with stress later in life.Reference Tronick140 When infants are awake, 91% of their time is spent with the primary caregiver, engaged in activities such as feeding and play.Reference Fracasso, Lamb, Scholmerich and Leyendecker141 The concept of ‘goodness of fit’ with the parenting or caregiving environment is recognized as one process by which infants may develop problems with coping and self-regulation later in life.

Goodness of fit

The ‘goodness of fit’ concept has its origin in the field of infant temperament,Reference Chess and Thomas142 but has broader applicability as a framework through which to understand developmental processes involving both infant and parent as they dynamically modify each other's behavior through continual positive or negative feedback. A good fit occurs when there is a match between the caregiving environment and the child's behavior, promoting the child's optimal developmental outcome. A poor fit involves a mismatch between child characteristics and the caregiving environment, leading to worse developmental outcome. For example, infant mental and language development was enhanced when mothers were better able to read their babies cry signals.Reference Lester, Boukydis and Garcia-Coll143 In addition, the combination of infant difficult temperament and dysfunctional family environment was a better predictor of child problem behavior than infant difficult temperament alone.Reference Maziade144 Finally, in intervention work where the caregiving environment is modified to meet the developmental needs of an infant with difficult temperament, better parent/child adaptation ensues.Reference Van den Boom145

Goodness of fit may explain findings relating HPA reactivity in infants to the quality of the attachment relationshipReference Spangler and Grossmann146, Reference Gunnar147 and to ‘face to face’ interaction.Reference Haley and Stansbury148 In the model (Fig. 2b) it is the ‘goodness of fit’ between the caregiving environment and infant neurobehavior, in the context of the broader distal environment that determines the infant's relative risk for the development of child mental health disorders. A match is when fetally programmed neurobehavior is compatible with the type of parenting appropriate for that infant. In a mismatch, parenting is not appropriate for the infant's neurobehavior. The probability of developing mental disorders is increased when the infant's capacities (altered by HPA set points) and parenting are a mismatch in the context of postnatal environmental adversity. Several studies have examined this mismatch as it impacts maternal mental health, which in turn can affect infant mental health. For instance, when maternal postnatal experience was negative relative to prenatal expectations of motherhood, mothers demonstrated greater depression symptomatology.Reference Harwood, McLean and Durkin149

An ‘Evo-Devo’ perspective

So far, we have described how altered HPA axis and behavioral responsivity could lead to child mental health disorders depending on the fit with the postnatal caregiving environment. However, from an evolutionary perspective there may also be adaptive value to these fetally programmed neuroendocrine and behavioral modifications. This understanding comes from the field of evolutionary developmental biology and is based on the recognition that gene–environment interactions are ubiquitous and extend to the activation of genetic activity by non-genetic influences. In addition to being agents of heredity, genes are now seen as playing a key role in the organization and regulation of development.Reference Hofer150, Reference Carroll151 Developmental outcomes are epigenetic not just genetic and this is also true as part of the evolutionary process. The view of development within evolutionary biology recognizes that changes in evolution reflect changes in development. In addition to the ‘traditional’ evolutionary processes of random genetic mutation, drift and recombination that produce phenotypic variation and are acted upon by natural selection, epigenetic processes are now seen as contributing to individual ontogeny and adaptation to the more immediate environment.

One of the evolutionary functions of development is the production of variability in developmental patterns to adapt to environmental change. Developmental interactions play a role in evolution as a source of novel variation. What becomes maladaptive may depend on the circumstances. For example, rats and monkeys raised in adversity show increased behavioral hypervigilance and greater stress reactivity, which is similar to children raised in poverty and social upheaval.Reference Cameron, Champagne and Parent152 These behavioral and physiological responses may actually serve to protect these children from an adverse environment by supporting their capacity to detect and respond to threats.Reference Boyce and Ellis153 Under experimental adversity (frequent separations), mothers become less attentive. Their offspring show maternal behavioral differences but they also grow up to be fearful with highly reactive adrenocortical responses, increased appetite, depression, cognitive deficits and rapid sexual maturation. In humans, we would typically classify these behaviors as psychopathological or maladaptive. Strikingly, the animal work shows that these traits are transmitted to the next generation even when the adverse conditions are no longer present. What these behaviors have in common is that they indicate increased behavioral and physiological variability that could increase the chances that a greater number of offspring will adapt and survive in chaotic and threatening situations in future generations. Offspring with ‘normal’ behavior and physiology may be less successful in chaotic and threatening conditions.

Behavior belongs to the class of allostatic systemsReference McEwen100 in which the ability to achieve stability through change is vital for survival. In contrast to homeostatic systems that must be maintained within narrow boundaries such as blood pH or body temperature, allostatic systems (including the HPA axis) have broader boundaries that enable us to cope with internal (e.g. infection) and external (e.g. poverty) demands. A narrow behavioral repertoire that could appear ‘economical’ in the short term by being less negatively affected by postnatal environmental challenges would, over time, be less able to adapt to a wide range of environmental conditions. The sobering thought is that what we label as ‘dysregulated’ behavior today could be beneficial in a different environment.Reference Hofer150 The increased vigilance and fighting behavior related to cortisol in animal studies could have survival value in hostile environments.

Similarly, although we might be tempted to classify the altered neuroendocrine and behavioral responses in our model as maladaptive, we can also hypothesize that this increased variability could be beneficial for long-term adaptation in a more unpredictable environment. Genetic evolutionary processes operate in the context of prolonged changes in the environment. Genetic variation needs to be maintained to accommodate a wide range of environments. If a given transient environment is unfavorable to phenotypic expression of a certain genotype, fewer genotypes will survive and if this pattern persists over generations, species survival could be threatened. As we have seen, fetal programming because of epigenetic changes enables individuals to adapt to the postnatal environment by increasing the range of phenotypes to a broader spectrum without changing the genotype. This phenotypic variability can therefore allow for a more rapid adaptation to what might be more immediate and transient environmental change, and in fact, the development of epigenetic regulation in fetal programming may be the product of evolution to face more rapidly changing environments than what can be accommodated by spontaneous mutation. For example, low birth weight, a putative marker for a stressful or adverse intrauterine environment, was significantly associated with a negative temperament.Reference Pluess and Belsky154 Negative temperament, in turn, served as a susceptibility factor such that when raised in environments of support, infants with negative temperaments showed the highest levels of socio-emotional functioning, but when raised in impoverished environments, these infants showed the lowest levels of socio-emotional functioning. Thus, low birth weight served as a marker for a susceptibility factor that enabled children to adapt (perhaps through epigenetic mechanisms) to postnatal demands in a way that may ultimately enhance their reproductive fitness.

The effects of prenatal stress on altering the sensitivity of the HPA axis could be an example of developmental plasticity, wherein, in response to environmental cues, the organism changes structure and function and increases the range of phenotypes that develop from a single genotype. The genome increases variability because prenatal stress is a signal that the fetus has to prepare for a different postnatal environment than the one for which it is programmed. Thus, increasing behavioral variability provides better opportunities for adaptation. Increased aggression or fear in the rat may be adaptive in some environments, but maladaptive in others. If there is a ‘good fit’ between the phenotype and the postnatal environment, a broader range of genotypes will survive the transient change and maximal genotypic variation will be preserved for long-term adaptation. The fetus could be programmed for a wide range of neuroendocrine and neurobehavioral responses as an adaptation to prepare for a more variable, less predictable, postnatal environment.

In addition, how the fetus is reprogrammed in response to an environmental signal obviously depends on the nature of the environmental signal. If the signal is poor nutrition, the reprogramming involves changing the set points of metabolic pathways. Here we have the case of a specific insult that triggers specific and directional effects. Our model is different because we are proposing a stress model and the stress signal is non-specific. In the same way that it makes sense for poor nutrition to affect metabolic pathways, it makes sense for stress signals to affect the stress (HPA) system. However, unlike poor nutrition, where the fetus has a specific environment to prepare for, the non-specific nature of stress may not enable the fetus to prepare for a specific environment. The reprogramming has to enable the fetus to adapt to a wide variety of postnatal environmental conditions, that is, a more unpredictable environment. Thus, rather than altering HPA set points in a specific direction, the alterations would more likely be bi-directional resulting in increased HPA variability. This would enable the fetus to prepare for a more unpredictable postnatal environment and increase the number of infants who could match with the postnatal environment. Similarly, we would expect to see analogous changes in infant neurobehavior; that prenatal stress would increase neurobehavioral variability, some infants will have a broader range of capacities than are typical, whereas others would have a more restricted range of capacities providing more opportunities to match with the postnatal environment.

In the model (Fig. 2b) the infant's responsivity is reprogrammed to allow for a range of predictable environments. The curved lines show the range of infant neurobehavioral adaptation. With a wider range of neurobehavioral adaptation, there is a very low probability for developing mental health disorders, as there are ample opportunities for matching with parenting behavior in the normal broader postnatal environment. However, the range of infant neurobehavioral adaptation is diminished by a poor fit with the parenting environment and further diminished by environmental adversity leading to high risk for developing mental health disorders. Epigenetic processes could operate both prenatally and postnatally affecting behavioral phenotypic expression and the dynamics of this system as we ‘drill down’ to the molecular level. We might also expect there to be a ‘cost’ to this HPA and neurobehavioral reprogramming such that it might be effective in the short term but wear down these systems faster if the reprogramming had not occurred, increasing allostatic load and perhaps leading to earlier onset and/or more pronounced manifestations of mental health disorders.

Of course this is one possible pathway. Different stressors or combinations of stressors will have different effects and multiple effects. Poor nutrition can affect metabolic pathways and also be a stressor. Poor nutrition can affect glucocorticoid regulation of body weight and stress can affect birth weight. A single insult such as prenatal cocaine exposure could affect the hippocampus directly as a teratogen and could also be a stressor. The total number of stressors may be important and there may be a threshold for the number of stressors, depending, in part on what they are.

Risk and protective factors

Risk and protective factors can be identified at several levels in this model. Prenatal stress includes a wide array of risk factors and could range from a poor reproductive and/or nutritional history to a more immediate event (e.g. maternal ingestion of a teratogen such as cocaine). These prenatal risk factors, alone and in combination, would create an at-risk intrauterine environment, setting off the cascade of prenatal events described in the model. Genetic risk factors include more sensitive genotypes with, for example, the SNP profile related to mental health disorders. Genetic protective factors include the resistant genotype absent in the SNP profiles. Developmental timing could be a risk factor if an insult occurs during a critical period. Epigenetic modification of specific fetal tissues can confer both risk and protection. Earlier, we mentioned epigenetic changes related to negative behavioral outcomes in both animal and human models. However, epigenetics can also be protective through gene expression control. DNA methylation, for example, can offset the effects of a deleterious polymorphism. The fact that epigenetic changes can be reversible and transgenerational suggests not only that protective factors can be ‘programmed’ but also that therapeutic interventions may support such positive changes.

Infant behavior (and later temperament and personality) has been described as a risk or protective factor and in our model would relate to variability in neurobehavioral adaptation. Although increased behavioral variability could be a risk factor, it could also be adaptive depending on environmental context. The match between infant and parent is an example of a protective factor that is important for resilience. Thus, the locus of resilience in our model is the upper left quadrant (Fig. 2b) where the child is growing up in an adverse environment, but there is a good fit between child behavior and parenting quality lowering the risk for developing mental health disorders. In addition, other protective factors have been identified including child temperament and personality characteristics, peer relationships and extracurricular activities (e.g. sports), all of which can contribute to resilience.

Populations at risk

The application of modern biology and the developmental origins perspective has lead to the identification of new populations at risk for child mental health disorders as well as a different understanding or redefinition of populations already known to be at risk. Categories for risk include the possibility that the impacts of famine, nutrition, poverty, war or dislocation of populations may take their progeny several generations to recover from and reach their full potential.Reference Harper155 Thus, some of the current impacts of risk may actually be fallout from a prior generation, exacerbated by new impacts within the generation and placing the next generation in increasing peril. Behaviors, phenotypes, illnesses and other traits once thought to be inter-generational or familial non-genetic heritable traits, that is, learned through caregiving and socialization or resulting from lifestyle, exposures or other experiences, may be epigenetically inheritable or may be the result of epigenetic modifications induced by nutrition, parenting practices and other experiences of the fetus, infant and young child.Reference Wakshlak and Weinstock71, Reference Whitelaw and Whitelaw156, Reference Belsky157 Such potentials, although speculative, seem reasonable and force new consideration of both the origin of traits once thought to be influenced solely by the child's environment and the therapeutic approaches built on these prior understandings. They also suggest that new approaches to understanding these mechanisms, their inheritance and their importance need to be developed and applied, including the growth of the field of human behavioral epigenetics.

Acknowledgments

Grant support: 1 R01 MH094609-01 (Marsit, PI) NIMH. The project described was also supported by Award Number F32DA032175 (Conradt, PI) from the National Institute on Drug Abuse. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute on Drug Abuse or the National Institutes of Health.

References

1.Barker, DJ, Osmond, C, Rodin, I, Fall, CH, Winter, PD. Low weight gain in infancy and suicide in adult life. BMJ. 1995; 311, 1203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Gluckman, PD, Hanson, MA. Living with the past: evolution, development, and patterns of disease. Science. 2004; 305, 17331736.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Welberg, LA, Seckl, JR. Prenatal stress, glucocorticoids and the programming of the brain. J Neuroendocrinol. 2001; 13, 113128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Barker, DJ, Osmond, C. Low birth weight and hypertension. BMJ. 1988; 297, 134135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Barker, DJ, Winter, PD, Osmond, C, Margetts, B, Simmonds, SJ. Weight in infancy and death from ischaemic heart disease. Lancet. 1989; 2, 577580.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Barker, D. Mothers, Babies and Health in Later Life, 1998. Churchill Livingstone: Edinburgh and New York.Google Scholar
7.Gluckman, PD, Hanson, MA. Developmental origins of disease paradigm: a mechanistic and evolutionary perspective. Pediatr Res. 2004; 56, 311317.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Barker, DJ. Fetal programming of coronary heart disease. Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2002; 13, 364368.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Barker, DJ, Osmond, C, Golding, J, Kuh, D, Wadsworth, ME. Growth in utero, blood pressure in childhood and adult life, and mortality from cardiovascular disease. BMJ. 1989; 298, 564567.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Falkner, B. Birth weight as a predictor of future hypertension. Am J Hypertens. 2002; 15(Pt 2), 43S45S.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Hales, CN, Barker, DJ, Clark, PM, et al.Fetal and infant growth and impaired glucose tolerance at age 64. BMJ. 1991; 303, 10191022.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.McMillen, IC, Robinson, JS. Developmental origins of the metabolic syndrome: prediction, plasticity, and programming. Physiol Rev. 2005; 85, 571633.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Pfister, HP, Muir, JL. Prenatal exposure to predictable and unpredictable novelty stress and oxytocin treatment affects offspring development and behavior in rats. Int J Neurosci. 1992; 62, 227241.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Rich-Edwards, J, Colditz, G, Stampfer, M, et al.Birthweight and the risk for type 2 diabetes mellitus in adult women. Ann Intern Med. 1999; 130, 278284.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Sallout, B, Walker, M. The fetal origin of adult diseases. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2003; 23, 555560.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Stein, CE, Fall, CH, Kumaran, K, et al. Fetal growth and coronary heart disease in south India. Lancet. 1996; 348, 12691273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Allin, M, Rooney, M, Cuddy, M, et al. Personality in young adults who are born preterm. Pediatrics. 2006; 117, 309316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Gale, CR, Martyn, CN. Birth weight and later risk of depression in a national birth cohort. Br J Psychiatry. 2004; 184, 2833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Thompson, C, Syddall, H, Rodin, I, Osmond, C, Barker, DJ. Birth weight and the risk of depressive disorder in late life. Br J Psychiatry. 2001; 179, 450455.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Wals, M, Reichart, CG, Hillegers, MH, et al. Impact of birth weight and genetic liability on psychopathology in children of bipolar parents. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2003; 42, 11161121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21.Cannon, TD, Rosso, IM. Levels of analysis in etiological research on schizophrenia. Dev Psychopathol. 2002; 14, 653666.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22.Alati, R, Lawlor, DA, Mamun, AA, et al. Is there a fetal origin of depression? Evidence from the Mater University Study of Pregnancy and its Outcomes. Am J Epidemiol. 2007; 165, 575582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Cheung, YB. Early origins and adult correlates of psychosomatic distress. Soc Sci Med. 2002; 55, 937948.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24.Cheung, YB, Khoo, KS, Karlberg, J, Machin, D. Association between psychological symptoms in adults and growth in early life: longitudinal follow up study. BMJ. 2002; 325, 749.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25.Wiles, NJ, Peters, TJ, Leon, DA, Lewis, G. Birth weight and psychological distress at age 45–51 years: results from the Aberdeen Children of the 1950s cohort study. Br J Psychiatry. 2005; 187, 2128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26.Schlotz, W, Phillips, DI. Fetal origins of mental health: evidence and mechanisms. Brain Behav Immun. 2009; 23, 905916.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27.Ravelli, AC, van Der Meulen, JH, Osmond, C, Barker, DJ, Bleker, OP. Obesity at the age of 50 y in men and women exposed to famine prenatally. Am J Clin Nutr. 1999; 70, 811816.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28.Ravelli, GP, Stein, ZA, Susser, MW. Obesity in young men after famine exposure in utero and early infancy. N Engl J Med. 1976; 295, 349353.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
29.Van Ijzendoorn, M, Bakermans-Kranenburg, M, Ebstein, R. Methylation matters in child development: toward developmental behavioral epigenetics. Child Dev Perspect. 2011; 5, 305310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30.Van den Bergh, BRH. Developmental programming of early brain and behavior development and mental health: a conceptual framework. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2011; 53, 1923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31.Waddington, C. Organisers and Genes, 1940. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
32.Van Speybroeck, L. From epigenesis to epigenetics. The case of C.H. Waddington. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2002; 981, 6181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
33.Bird, A. Perceptions of epigenetics. Nature. 2007; 447, 396398.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
34.World Health Organization. Promoting optimal fetal development: report of a technical consultation. Retrieved 19 April 2012 from http://www.who.int/nutrition/topics/fetal_dev_report_EN.pdfGoogle Scholar
35.Waterland, RA, Jirtle, RL. Transposable elements: targets for early nutritional effects on epigenetic gene regulation. Mol Cell Biol. 2003; 23, 52935300.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
36.Lillycrop, K, Phillips, E, Jackson, A, Hanson, M, Burdge, G. Dietary protein restriction of pregnant rats induces and folic acid supplementation prevents epigenetic modification of hepatic gene expression in the offspring. J Nutr. 2005; 135, 13821386.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
37.Deal, RB, Henikoff, JG, Henikoff, S. Genome-wide kinetics of nucleosome turnover determined by metabolic labeling of histones. Science. 2010; 328, 11611164.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
38.Lester, BM, Tronick, E, Nestler, E, et al. Behavioral epigenetics. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2011; 1226, 1433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
39.Oberlander, TF, Weinberg, J, Papsdorf, M, et al. Prenatal exposure to maternal depression, neonatal methylation of human glucocorticoid receptor gene (NR3C1) and infant cortisol stress responses. Epigenetics. 2008; 3, 97106.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
40.Essex, MJ, Thomas Boyce, W, Hertzman, C, et al. Epigenetic vestiges of early developmental adversity: childhood stress exposure and DNA methylation in adolescence. Child Dev. 2011. Epub, doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01641.xGoogle ScholarPubMed
41.Lester, B, Padbury, J. The third pathophysiology of prenatal cocaine exposure. Special Issue Dev Neurosci. 2009; 31, 2335.Google ScholarPubMed
42.Marsit, CJ, Maccani, MA, Padbury, JF, Lester, BM. Placental 11-beta hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase methylation is associated with newborn growth and a measure of neurobehavioral outcome. PLoS One. 2012; 7, e33794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
43.Bromer, C, Marsit, C, Padbury, J, Lester, B. Genetic and epigenetic variation of the glucocorticoid receptor (NR3C1) in placenta and neurobehavior. Dev Psychobiol. 2004; 160, 854860.Google Scholar
44.Marsit, CJ, Lambertini, L, Maccani, MA, et al. Placenta-imprinted gene expression association of infant neurobehavior. J Pediatr. 2011.Google ScholarPubMed
45.Gitau, R, Cameron, A, Fisk, NM, Glover, V. Fetal exposure to maternal cortisol. Lancet. 1998; 352, 707708.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
46.Matthews, S. Early programming of the hypothalamo–pituitary–adrenal axis. Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2002; 13, 373380.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
47.Padbury, JF, Martinez, AM. Sympathoadrenal system activity at birth: integration of postnatal adaptation. Semin Perinatol. 1988; 12, 163172.Google ScholarPubMed
48.Matthews, S. Antenatal glucocorticoids and the developing brain: mechanisms of action. Semin Neonatal. 2001; 6, 309317.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
49.Slone-Wilcoxon, J, Redei, EE. Maternal-fetal glucocorticoid milieu programs hypothalamic–pituitary–thyroid function of adult offspring. Endocrinology. 2004; 145, 40684072.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
50.Slotkin, TA, Orband-Miller, L, Queen, KL, Whitmore, WL, Seidler, FJ. Effects of prenatal nicotine exposure on biochemical development of rat brain regions: maternal drug infusions via osmotic minipumps. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1987; 240, 602611.Google ScholarPubMed
51.Williams, MT, Hennessy, MB, Davis, HN. Stress during pregnancy alters rat offspring morphology and ultrasonic vocalizations. Physiol Behav. 1998; 63, 337343.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
52.Haussmann, MF, Carroll, JA, Weesner, GD, et al. Administration of ACTH to restrained, pregnant sows alters their pigs’ hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis. J Anim Sci. 2000; 78, 23992411.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
53.Griffin, WC, Skinner, HD, Salm, AK, Birkle, DL. Mild prenatal stress in rats is associated with enhanced conditioned fear. Physiol Behav. 2003; 79, 209215.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
54.French, NP, Hagan, R, Evans, SF, Mullan, A, Newnham, JP. Repeated antenatal corticosteroids: effects on cerebral palsy and childhood behavior. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 190, 588595.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
55.Lou, H, Hansen, C, Nordentoft, M, et al.Prenatal stressors of human life affect fetal brain development. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1994; 36, 826832.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
56.Rieger, M, Pirke, KM, Buske-Kirschbaum, A, et al. Influence of stress during pregnancy on HPA activity and neonatal behavior. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2004; 1032, 228230.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
57.Van den Bergh, BRH. The influence of maternal emotions during pregnancy on fetal and neonatal behavior. J Prenat Perinat Psychol Health. 1990; 5, 119130.Google Scholar
58.Van den Bergh, BRH. Maternal emotions during pregnancy and fetal and neonatal behavior. In Fetal Behavior: Developmental and Perinatal Aspects (ed. Nijhuis J), 1992; pp. 157178. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
59.Van den Bergh, BRH, Mulder, EJH, Mennesa, M, Glover, V. Antenatal maternal anxiety and stress and neurobehavioral development of the fetus and child: links and possible mechanisms: a review. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2005; 29, 237258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
60.Van den Bergh, BRH, Van Calster, B, Smits, T, Van Huffel, S, Lagae, L. Antenatal maternal anxiety is related to HPA-axis dysregulation and self-reported depressive symptoms in adolescence: a prospective study on the fetal origins of depressed mood. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2008; 33, 536545.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
61.Lester, BM, Lagasse, LL, Shankaran, S, et al. Prenatal cocaine exposure related to cortisol stress reactivity in 11-year-old children. J Pediatr. 2010; 157, 288295 e1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
62.Bauer, CR, Lambert, BL, Bann, CM, et al. Long-term impact of maternal substance use during pregnancy and extrauterine environmental adversity: stress hormone levels of preadolescent children. Pediatr Res. 2011; 70, 213219.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
63.Fisher, P, Kim, H, Bruce, J, Pears, K. Cumulative effects of prenatal substance exposure and early adversity on foster children's HPA axis reactivity during a psychosocial stressor. Int J Behav Dev. 2011; 36, 2935.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
64.Barbazanges, A, Piazza, PV, Le Moal, M, Maccari, S. Maternal glucocorticoid secretion mediates long-term effects of prenatal stress. J Neurosci. 1996; 16, 39433949.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
65.Henry, C, Kabbaj, M, Simon, H, Le Moal, M, Maccari, S. Prenatal stress increases the hypothalamo–pituitary–adrenal axis response in young and adult rats. J Neuroendocrinol. 1994; 6, 341345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
66.Henry, C, Kabbaj, M, Simon, H, LeMoal, M, Maccari, S. Prenatal stress induces high anxiety and postnatal handling induces low anxiety in adult offspring: correlation with stress induced corticosterone secretion. J Neuroendocrinol. 1994; 6, 341345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
67.Maccari, S, Piazza, PV, Kabbaj, M, et al.Adoption reverses the long-term impairment in glucocorticoid feedback induced by prenatal stress. J Neurosci. 1995; 15(Pt 1), 110116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
68.Vallee, M, Mayo, W, Dellu, F, et al.Prenatal stress induces high anxiety and postnatal handling induces low anxiety in adult offspring: correlation with stress-induced corticosterone secretion. J Neurosci. 1997; 17, 26262636.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
69.Fride, E, Dan, Y, Feldon, J, Halevy, G, Weinstock, M. Effects of prenatal stress on vulnerability to stress in prepubertal and adult rats. Physiol Behav. 1986; 37, 681687.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
70.Poltyrev, T, Keshet, GI, Kay, G, Weinstock, M. Role of experimental conditions in determining differences in exploratory behavior of prenatally stressed rats. Dev Psychobiol. 1996; 29, 453462.3.0.CO;2-N>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
71.Wakshlak, A, Weinstock, M. Neonatal handling reverses behavioral abnormalities induced in rats by prenatal stress. Physiol Behav. 1990; 48, 289292.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
72.Takahashi, LK, Haglin, C, Kalin, NH. Prenatal stress potentiates stress-induced behavior and reduces the propensity to play in juvenile rats. Physiol Behav. 1992; 51, 319323.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
73.Takahashi, LK, Turner, JG, Kalin, NH. Prenatal stress alters brain catecholaminergic activity and potentiates stress-induced behavior in adult rats. Brain Res. 1992; 574, 131137.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
74.Lambert, KG, Kinsley, CH, Jones, HE, et al.Prenatal stress attenuates ulceration in the activity stress paradigm. Physiol Behav. 1995; 57, 989994.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
75.Weller, A, Glaubman, H, Yehuda, S, Caspy, T, Ben-Uria, Y. Acute and repeated gestational stress affect offspring learning and activity in rats. Physiol Behav. 1988; 43, 139143.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
76.Hayashi, A, Nagaoka, M, Yamada, K, et al. Maternal stress induces synaptic loss and developmental disabilities of offspring. Int J Dev Neurosci. 1998; 16, 209216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
77.Szuran, T, Zimmermann, E, Welzl, H. Water maze performance and hippocampal weight of prenatally stressed rats. Behav Brain Res. 1994; 65, 153155.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
78.Vallee, M, MacCari, S, Dellu, F, et al.Long-term effects of prenatal stress and postnatal handling on age-related glucocorticoid secretion and cognitive performance: a longitudinal study in the rat. Eur J Neurosci. 1999; 11, 29062916.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
79.Meaney, M, Seckl, J. Glucocorticoid programming. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2004; 1032, 6384.Google Scholar
80.Roughton, EC, Schneider, ML, Bromley, LJ, Coe, CL. Maternal endocrine activation during pregnancy alters neurobehavioral state in primate infants. Am J Occup Ther. 1998; 52, 9098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
81.Schneider, ML, Moore, CF, Kraemer, GW. Moderate level alcohol during pregnancy, prenatal stress, or both and limbic–hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenocortical axis response to stress in rhesus monkeys. Child Dev. 2004; 75, 96109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
82.Schneider, ML. Prenatal stress exposure alters postnatal behavioral expression under conditions of novelty challenge in rhesus monkey infants. Dev Psychobiol. 1992; 25, 529540.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
83.McEwen, BS. Glucocorticoid–biogenic amine interactions in relation to mood and behavior. Biochem Pharmacol. 1987; 36, 17551763.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
84.Maes, M, Meltzer, HY, D'Hondt, P, Cosyns, P, Blockx, P. Effects of serotonin precursors on the negative feedback effects of glucocorticoids on hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis function in depression. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 1995; 20, 149167.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
85.Meador-Woodruff, JH, Greden, JF, Grunhaus, L, Haskett, RF. Severity of depression and hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis dysregulation: identification of contributing factors. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1990; 81, 364371.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
86.Nemeroff, CB, Widerlov, E, Bissette, G, et al. Elevated concentrations of CSF corticotropin-releasing factor-like immunoreactivity in depressed patients. Science. 1984; 226, 13421344.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
87.van Praag, H. Depression. Lancet. 1982; 8310, 12591264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
88.Wadhwa, PD, Garite, TJ, Porto, M, et al. Placental corticotropin-releasing hormone (CRH), spontaneous preterm birth, and fetal growth restriction: a prospective investigation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 191, 10631069.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
89.Wadhwa, PD, Sandman, CA, Garite, TJ. The neurobiology of stress in human pregnancy: implications for prematurity and development of the fetal central nervous system. Prog Brain Res. 2001; 133, 131142.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
90.Kajantie, E, Raikkonen, K. Early life predictors of the physiological stress response later in life. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2010; 35, 2332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
91.van Os, J, Selten, J. Prenatal exposure to maternal stress and subsequent schizophrenia. Br J Psychiatry. 1998; 172, 324326.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
92.Field, T. Stress and coping from pregnancy through the postnatal period. In Life-Span Developmental Psychology: Perspectives on Stress and Coping (ed. Cummings E), 1991; pp. 4559. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Hillsdale, NJ, USA.Google Scholar
93.Huizink, AC, Robles de Medina, PG, Mulder, EJ, Visser, GH, Buitelaar, JK. Stress during pregnancy is associated with developmental outcome in infancy. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2003; 44, 810818.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
94.Levy-Shiff, R, Dimitrovsky, L, Shulman, S, Har-Even, D. Cognitive appraisals, coping strategies, and support resources as correlates of parenting and infant development. Dev Psychol. 1998; 34, 14171427.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
95.Meijer, A. Child psychiatric sequelae of maternal war stress. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1985; 72, 505511.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
96.Stott, DH. Follow-up study from birth of the effects of prenatal stresses. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1973; 15, 770787.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
97.Ward, AJ. Prenatal stress and childhood psychopathology. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev. 1991; 22, 97110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
98.DePietro, J. The role of prenatal maternal stress in child development. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2004; 13, 7174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
99.Bremner, JD, Randall, P, Vermetten, E, et al.Magnetic resonance imaging-based measurement of hippocampal volume in posttraumatic stress disorder related to childhood physical and sexual abuse – a preliminary report. Biol Psychiatry. 1997; 41, 2332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
100.McEwen, BS. Protective and damaging effects of stress mediators. N Engl J Med. 1998; 338, 171179.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
101.McEwen, BS. Early life influences on life-long patterns of behavior and health. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev. 2003; 9, 149154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
102.Felitti, V, Anda, R, Nordenberg, D, et al.The relationship of adult health status to childhood abuse and household dysfunction. J Prev Med. 1998; 14, 42454258.Google ScholarPubMed
103.Meyer, JS. Biochemical effects of corticosteroids on neural tissues. Physiol Rev. 1985; 65, 9461020.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
104.Lopez Bernal, A, Craft, IL. Corticosteroid metabolism in vitro by human placenta, fetal membranes and decidua in early and late gestation. Placenta. 1981; 2, 279285.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
105.Benediktsson, R, Lindsay, RS, Noble, J, Seckl, JR, Edwards, CR. Glucocorticoid exposure in utero: new model for adult hypertension. Lancet. 1993; 341, 339341.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
106.McTernan, CL, Draper, N, Nicholson, H, et al.Reduced placental 11beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 2 mRNA levels in human pregnancies complicated by intrauterine growth restriction: an analysis of possible mechanisms. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2001; 86, 49794983.Google Scholar
107.Murphy, VE, Zakar, T, Smith, R, et al.Reduced 11beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 2 activity is associated with decreased birth weight centile in pregnancies complicated by asthma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2002; 87, 16601668.Google ScholarPubMed
108.Shams, M, Kilby, MD, Somerset, DA, et al.11beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 2 in human pregnancy and reduced expression in intrauterine growth restriction. Hum Reprod. 1998; 13, 799804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
109.Stewart, P, Roberson, F, Mason, J. Type 2 11-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase messenger RNA and activity in human placenta and fetal membranes: its relationship to birth weight and putative role in fetal steroidogenesis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1995; 80, 885890.Google Scholar
110.Holmes, MC, Abrahamsen, CT, French, KL, et al.The mother or the fetus? 11beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 2 null mice provide evidence for direct fetal programming of behavior by endogenous glucocorticoids. J Neurosci. 2006; 26, 38403844.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
111.Dave-Sharma, S, Wilson, R, Harbison, M. Extensive personal experience: examination of genotype and phenotype relationships in 14 patients with apparent mineralocorticoid excess. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1998; 83, 22442254.Google Scholar
112.Seckl, JR, Cleasby, M, Nyirenda, MJ. Glucocorticoids, 11beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase, and fetal programming. Kidney Int. 2000; 57, 14121417.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
113.Edwards, CR, Benediktsson, R, Lindsay, RS, Seckl, JR. Dysfunction of placental glucocorticoid barrier: link between fetal environment and adult hypertension? Lancet. 1993; 341, 355357.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
114.Seckl, JR. Glucocorticoids, feto-placental 11 beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 2, and the early life origins of adult disease. Steroids. 1997; 62, 8994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
115.Bohn, MC. Granule cell genesis in the hippocampus of rats treated neonatally with hydrocortisone. Neuroscience. 1980; 5, 20032012.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
116.Gould, E, Woolley, CS, Cameron, HA, Daniels, DC, McEwen, BS. Adrenal steroids regulate postnatal development of the rat dentate gyrus: II. Effects of glucocorticoids and mineralocorticoids on cell birth. J Comp Neurol. 1991; 313, 486493.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
117.Gould, E, Woolley, CS, McEwen, BS. Adrenal steroids regulate postnatal development of the rat dentate gyrus: I. Effects of glucocorticoids on cell death. J Comp Neurol. 1991; 313, 479485.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
118.Sarkar, S, Tsai, S, Nguyen, T, Plevyak, M, Padbury, J. Inhibition of placental 11β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 2 by catecholamines via α-adrenergic signaling. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2001; 281, R1966R1974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
119.Bottalico, B, Larsson, I, Brodszki, J, et al.Norepinephrine transporter (NET), serotonin transporter (SERT), vesicular monoamine transporter (VMAT2) and organic cation transporters (OCT1, 2 and EMT) in human placenta from pre-eclamptic and normotensive pregnancies. Placenta. 2004; 25, 518529.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
120.Bzoskie, L, Yen, J, Tseng, YT, et al.Human placental norepinephrine transporter mRNA: expression and correlation with fetal condition at birth. Placenta. 1997; 18, 205210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
121.Alikhani-Koopaei, R, Fouladkou, F, Frey, FJ, Frey, BM. Epigenetic regulation of 11 beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 2 expression. J Clin Invest. 2004; 114, 11461157.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
122.Friso, S, Pizzolo, F, Choi, SW, et al.Epigenetic control of 11 beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase 2 gene promoter is related to human hypertension. Atherosclerosis. 2008; 199, 323327.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
123.Alikhani-Koupaei, R, Fouladkou, F, Fustier, P, et al.Identification of polymorphisms in the human 11beta hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 2 gene promoter: functional characterization and relevance for salt sensitivity. FASEB J. 2007; 21, 111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
124.Zanchi, N, Filho, M, Felitti, V, et al.Glucocorticoids: extensive physiological actions modulated through multiple mechanisms of gene regulation. J Cell Physiol. 2010; 224, 311315.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
125.Yudt, MR, Cidlowski, JA. The glucocorticoid receptor: coding a diversity of proteins and responses through a single gene. Mol Endocrinol. 2002; 16, 17191726.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
126.Johnson, RF, Rennie, N, Murphy, V, et al.Expression of glucocorticoid receptor messenger ribonucleic acid transcripts in the human placenta at term. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008; 93, 48874893.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
127.Meaney, MJ, Szyf, M. Maternal care as a model for experience-dependent chromatin plasticity? Trends Neurosci. 2005; 28, 456463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
128.Weaver, IC, Cervoni, N, Champagne, FA, et al.. Epigenetic programming by maternal behavior. Nat Neurosci. 2004; 7, 847854.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
129.Liu, D, Diorio, J, Day, JC, Francis, DD, Meaney, MJ. Maternal care, hippocampal synaptogenesis and cognitive development in rats. Nat Neurosci. 2000; 3, 799806.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
130.Mark, PJ, Augustus, S, Lewis, JL, Hewitt, DP, Waddell, BJ. Changes in the placental glucocorticoid barrier during rat pregnancy: impact on placental corticosterone levels and regulation by progesterone. Biol Reprod. 2009; 80, 12091215.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
131.Yiallourides, M, Sebert, SP, Wilson, V, et al.The differential effects of the timing of maternal nutrient restriction in the ovine placenta on glucocorticoid sensitivity, uncoupling protein 2, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma and cell proliferation. Reproduction. 2009; 138, 601608.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
132.Filiberto, AC, Maccani, MA, Koestler, D, et al.Birthweight is associated with DNA promoter methylation of the glucocorticoid receptor in human placenta. Epigenetics. 2011; 6, 566572.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
133.Lester, BM, Tronick, EZ. The Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Network Neurobehavioral Scale (NNNS). Pediatrics (Supplement). 2004; 113, 631699.Google Scholar
134.El-Dib, M, Massaro, AN, Glass, P, Aly, H. Neurobehavioral assessment as a predictor of neurodevelopmental outcome in preterm infants. J Perinatol. 2011; 32, 299303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
135.Stephens, BE, Liu, J, Lester, B, et al.Neurobehavioral assessment predicts motor outcome in preterm infants. J Pediatr. 2010; 156, 366371.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
136.Liu, J, Bann, C, Lester, B, et al.Neonatal neurobehavior predicts medical and behavioral outcome. Pediatrics. 2010; 125, e90e98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
137.Houseman, EA, Christensen, BC, Yeh, RF, et al.Model-based clustering of DNA methylation array data: a recursive-partitioning algorithm for high-dimensional data arising as a mixture of beta distributions. BMC Bioinformatics. 2008; 9 365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
138.Calkins, S, Hill, A. Caregiver influences on emerging emotion regulation: biological and environmental transactions in early development. In Handbook of Emotion Regulation (ed. Gross J), 2007; pp. 229248. The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
139.Cohn, JF, Tronick, E. Specificity of infants’ response to mothers’ affective behavior. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1989; 28, 242248.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
140.Tronick, E. The neurobehavioral and social-emotional development of infants and children, 2007. W.W. Norton & Company: New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
141.Fracasso, M, Lamb, M, Scholmerich, A, Leyendecker, B. The ecology of mother–infant interaction in Euroamerican and immigrant central American families living in the United States. Int J Behav Dev. 1997; 20, 207218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
142.Chess, S, Thomas, A. Temperament and the concept of goodness of fit. In Explorations in Temperament (eds. Strelau J, Angleitner A), 1991, 15–28. Plenum: New York.Google Scholar
143.Lester, B, Boukydis, C, Garcia-Coll, C, et al.Developmental outcome as a function of the goodness of fit between the infant's cry characteristics and the mother's perception of her infant's cry. Pediatrics. 1995; 95, 516521.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
144.Maziade, M. Should adverse temperament matter to the clinician? An empirically based answer. In Temperament in Childhood (eds. Kohnstamm G, Bates JE, Rothbart M), 1989; pp. 263281. Wiley: New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
145.Van den Boom, D. The influence of temperament and mothering on attachment and exploration: an experimental manipulation of sensitive responsiveness among lower-class mothers with irritable infants. Child Dev. 1994; 65, 14591477.Google ScholarPubMed
146.Spangler, G, Grossmann, KE. Biobehavioral organization in securely and insecurely attached infants. Child Dev. 1993; 64, 14391450.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
147.Gunnar, M. Psychoendocrine study of temperament and stress in early childhood: expanding current models. In Temperament: Individual Differences at the Interface of Biology and Behavior (eds. Bates J, Wachs TD), 1994; pp. 175198. American Psychological Association Press: New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
148.Haley, DW, Stansbury, K. Infant stress and parent responsiveness: regulation of physiology and behavior during still-face and reunion. Child Dev. 2003; 74, 15341546.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
149.Harwood, K, McLean, N, Durkin, K. First-time mothers’ expectations of parenthood: What happens when optimistic expectations are not matched by later experiences? Dev Psychol. 2007; 43, 112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
150.Hofer, MA. Evolutionary basis of adaptation in resilience and vulnerability: response to Cicchetti and Blender. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2006; 1094, 259262.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
151.Carroll, S. Endless Forms Most Beautiful: The New Science of Evo-Devo, 2005. W.W. Norton & Company: New York.Google Scholar
152.Cameron, NM, Champagne, FA, Parent, C, et al.The programming of individual differences in defensive responses and reproductive strategies in the rat through variations in maternal care. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2005; 29, 843865.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
153.Boyce, WT, Ellis, BJ. Biological sensitivity to context: I. An evolutionary-developmental theory of the origins and functions of stress reactivity. Dev Psychopathol. 2005; 17, 271301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
154.Pluess, M, Belsky, J. Prenatal programming of postnatal plasticity? Dev Psychopathol. 2011; 23, 2938.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
155.Harper, LV. Epigenetic inheritance and the intergenerational transfer of experience. Psychol Bull. 2005; 131, 340360.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
156.Whitelaw, NC, Whitelaw, E. How lifetimes shape epigenotype within and across generations. Hum Mol Genet. 2006; 15 (Spec No. 2), R131R137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
157.Belsky, J. War, trauma and children's development: observations from a modern evolutionary perspective. Int J Behav Dev. 2008; 32, 260271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1 Epigenetic citations by search terms. Citation search for epigenetic articles by year of publication. The number of published articles using the terms ‘epigenetics’, ‘epigenetics and disease’ and ‘epigenetics and behavior’ indicating the recent emergence of the field of behavioral epigenetics.

Figure 1

Fig. 2 Developmental Origins Model of child mental health disorders. The model illustrates one of many pathways in which prenatal environmental stressors could impact placental gene expression altering HPA set points and the infant's responsivity to postnatal environmental conditions affecting liability to mental health disorders. Epigenetic effects on key placental genes (shaded in a) increase fetal exposure to cortisol altering the abilities of the infant to respond to the postnatal environment which includes both parenting and broader environmental conditions. The ‘Goodness of Fit’ (b) or relative match or mismatch between the infant's capacities and the kind of parenting appropriate for the infant's capacities in the context of the degree of adversity of the broader postnatal environment will determine the probability of risk for mental health disorders. This risk is maximized when the infant has restricted behavioral capacities that clash (are a mismatch) with parenting styles in the context of environmental adversity (based on Gluckman and Hanson 2005).

Figure 2

Fig. 3 Heatmap showing four classes of expression signature of the 22 imprinted genes. Gaussian recursively partitioned mixture models, a hierarchical clustering, based on imprinted gene expression identifying 4 distinct classes of expression signature. Samples are in rows, and the expression of the 22 imprinted genes examined is shown by the heatmap in column. The dendrogram depicts the splitting of the samples into 4 classes, which are separated on the heat map by red lines and labeled classes 1, 2, 3 and 4