MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2977905557 · doi:10.1101/787291

Facial shape and allometry quantitative trait locus intervals in the Diversity Outbred mouse are enriched for known skeletal and facial development genes

2019· preprint· en· W2977905557 on OpenAlexaff
David C. Katz, J. David Aponte, Wei Liu, Rebecca M. Green, Jessica Mayeux, K. Michael Pollard, Daniel Pomp, Steven C. Munger, Steven A. Murray, Charles C. Roseman, Christopher J. Percival, James M. Cheverud, Ralph Marcucio, Benedikt Hallgrímsson

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalAlberta Bone and Joint Health InstituteUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantitative trait locusBiologyAllometryEvolutionary biologyGeneticsTraitPopulationAlleleLocus (genetics)GeneEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The biology of how faces are built and come to differ from one another is complex. Discovering the genes that contribute to differences in facial morphology is one key to untangling this complexity, with important implications for medicine and evolutionary biology. This study maps quantitative trait loci (QTL) for skeletal facial shape using Diversity Outbred (DO) mice. The DO is a randomly outcrossed population with high heterozygosity that captures the allelic diversity of eight inbred mouse lines from three subspecies. The study uses a sample of 1147 DO animals (the largest sample yet employed for a shape QTL study in mouse), each characterized by 22 three-dimensional landmarks, 56,885 autosomal and X-chromosome markers, and sex and age classifiers. We identified 37 facial shape QTL across 20 shape principal components (PCs) using a mixed effects regression that accounts for kinship among observations. The QTL include some previously identified intervals as well as new regions that expand the list of potential targets for future experimental study. Three QTL characterized shape associations with size (allometry). Median support interval size was 3.5 Mb. Narrowing additional analysis to QTL for the five largest magnitude shape PCs, we found significant overrepresentation of genes with known roles in growth, skeletal development, and sensory organ development. For most intervals, one or more of these genes lies within 0.25 Mb of the QTL’s peak. QTL effect sizes were small, with none explaining more than 0.5% of facial shape variation. Thus, our results are consistent with a model of facial diversity that is influenced by key genes in skeletal and facial development and, simultaneously, is highly polygenic. Author Summary The mammalian face is a complex structure serving many functions. We studied the genetic basis for facial skeletal diversity in a large sample of mice from an experimental population designed for the study of complex traits. We quantified the contribution of genetic variation to variation in three-dimensional facial shape across more than 55,000 genetic markers spread throughout the mouse genome. We found 37 genetic regions which are very likely to contribute to differences in facial shape. We then conducted a more detailed analysis of the genetic regions associated with the most variable aspects of facial shape. For these regions, a disproportionately large number of genes are known to be important to growth and to skeletal and facial development. The magnitude of these genetic contributions to differences in facial shape are consistently small. Our results therefore support the notion that facial skeletal diversity is influenced by many genes of small effect, but that some of these small effects may be related to genes that are fundamental to skeletal and facial development.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and AnimalsFrench-language works237,207