Successful identification of rare variants using oligogenic segregation analysis as a prioritizing tool for whole-exome sequencing studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We aim to identify rare variants that have large effects on trait variance using a cost-efficient strategy. We use an oligogenic segregation analysis as a prioritizing tool for whole-exome sequencing studies to identify families more likely to harbor rare variants, by estimating the mean number of quantitative trait loci (QTLs) in each family. We hypothesize that families with additional QTLs, relative to the other families, are more likely to segregate functional rare variants. We test the association of rare variants with the traits only in regions where at least modest evidence of linkage with the trait is observed, thereby reducing the number of tests performed. We found that family 7 harbored an estimated two, one, and zero additional QTLs for traits Q1, Q2, and Q4, respectively. Two rare variants (C4S4935 and C6S2981) segregating in family 7 were associated with Q1 and explained a substantial proportion of the observed linkage signal. These rare variants have 31 and 22 carriers, respectively, in the 128-member family and entered through a single but different founder. For Q2, we found one rare variant unique to family 7 that showed small effect and weak evidence of association; this was a false positive. These results are a proof of principle that prioritizing the sequencing of carefully selected extended families is a simple and cost-efficient design strategy for sequencing studies aiming at identifying functional rare variants.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".