Recovery of trait heritability from whole genome sequence data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Heritability, the proportion of phenotypic variance explained by genetic factors, can be estimated from pedigree data 1 , but such estimates are uninformative with respect to the underlying genetic architecture. Analyses of data from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) on unrelated individuals have shown that for human traits and disease, approximately one-third to two-thirds of heritability is captured by common SNPs 2–5 . It is not known whether the remaining heritability is due to the imperfect tagging of causal variants by common SNPs, in particular if the causal variants are rare, or other reasons such as overestimation of heritability from pedigree data. Here we show that pedigree heritability for height and body mass index (BMI) appears to be largely recovered from whole-genome sequence (WGS) data on 25,465 unrelated individuals of European ancestry. We assigned 33.7 million genetic variants to groups based upon their minor allele frequencies (MAF) and linkage disequilibrium (LD) with variants nearby, and estimated and partitioned genetic variance accordingly. The estimated heritability was 0.68 (SE 0.10) for height and 0.30 (SE 0.10) for BMI, with a range of ~0.60 – 0.71 for height and ~0.25 – 0.35 for BMI, depending on quality control and analysis strategies. Low-MAF variants in low LD with neighbouring variants were enriched for heritability, to a greater extent for protein-altering variants, consistent with negative selection thereon. Cumulatively variants with 0.0001 < MAF < 0.1 explained 0.47 (SE 0.07) and 0.30 (SE 0.10) of heritability for height and BMI, respectively. Our results imply that rare variants, in particular those in regions of low LD, is a major source of the still missing heritability of complex traits and disease.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".