Analytical strategies to include the X-chromosome in variance heterogeneity analyses: evidence for trait-specific polygenic variance structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Genotype-stratified variance of a quantitative trait could differ in the presence of gene-gene or gene-environment interactions. Genetic markers associated with phenotypic variance are thus considered promising candidates for follow-up interaction or joint location-scale analyses. However, as in studies of main effects, the X-chromosome is routinely excluded from ‘whole-genome’ scans due to analytical challenges. Specifically, as males carry only one copy of the X-chromosome, the inherent sex-genotype dependency could bias the trait-genotype association, through sexual dimorphism in quantitative traits with sex-specific means or variances. Here we investigate phenotypic variance heterogeneity associated with X-chromosome SNPs and propose valid and powerful strategies. Among those, a generalized Levene’s test has adequate power and remains robust to sexual dimorphism. An alternative approach is sex-stratified analysis but at the cost of slightly reduced power and modeling flexibility. We applied both methods to an Estonian study of gene expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL; n =841), and two complex trait studies of height, hip and waist circumferences, and body mass index from multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis (MESA; n =2,073) and UK Biobank (UKB; n =327,393). Consistent with previous eQTL findings on mean, we found some but no conclusive evidence for cis regulators being enriched for variance association. SNP rs2681646 is associated with variance of waist circumference ( p =9.5E-07) at X-chromosome-wide significance in UKB, with a suggestive female-specific effect in MESA ( p =0.048). Collectively, an enrichment analysis using permutated UKB ( p <1/10) and MESA ( p <1/100) datasets, suggests a possible polygenic structure for the variance of human height.
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 | 0.038 | 0.103 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".