Contribution of Large Region Joint Associations to Complex Traits Genetics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A polygenic model of inheritance, whereby hundreds or thousands of weakly associated variants contribute to a trait's heritability, has been proposed to underlie the genetic architecture of complex traits. However, relatively few genetic variants have been positively identified so far and they collectively explain only a small fraction of the predicted heritability. We hypothesized that joint association of multiple weakly associated variants over large chromosomal regions contributes to complex traits variance. Confirmation of such regional associations can help identify new loci and lead to a better understanding of known ones. To test this hypothesis, we first characterized the ability of commonly used genetic association models to identify large region joint associations. Through theoretical derivation and simulation, we showed that multivariate linear models where multiple SNPs are included as independent predictors have the most favorable association profile. Based on these results, we tested for large region association with height in 3,740 European participants from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) study. Adjusting for SNPs with known association with height, we demonstrated clustering of weak associations (p = 2x10-4) in regions extending up to 433.0 Kb from known height loci. The contribution of regional associations to phenotypic variance was estimated at 0.172 (95% CI 0.063-0.279; p < 0.001), which compared favorably to 0.129 explained by known height variants. Conversely, we showed that suggestively associated regions are enriched for known height loci. To extend our findings to other traits, we also tested BMI, HDLc and CRP for large region associations, with consistent results for CRP. Our results demonstrate the presence of large region joint associations and suggest these can be used to pinpoint weakly associated SNPs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".