Concurrent outcomes from multiple approaches of epistasis analysis for human body mass index associated loci provide insights into obesity biology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genome wide association studies (GWAS) have focused on elucidating the genetic architecture of complex traits by assessing single variant effects in additive genetic models, albeit explaining a fraction of the trait heritability. Epistasis has recently emerged as one of the intrinsic mechanisms that could explain part of this missing heritability. We conducted epistasis analysis for genome-wide body mass index (BMI) associated SNPs in Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) and followed up top significant interacting SNPs for replication in the UK Biobank imputed genotype dataset. We report two pairwise epistatic interactions, between rs2177596 (RHBDD1) and rs17759796 (MAPK1), rs1121980 (FTO) and rs6567160 (MC4R), obtained from a consensus of nine different epistatic approaches. Gene interaction maps and tissue expression profiles constructed for these interacting loci highlights co-expression, co-localisation, physical interaction, genetic interaction, and shared pathways emphasising the neuronal influence in obesity and implicating concerted expression of associated genes in liver, pancreas, and adipose tissues insinuating to metabolic abnormalities characterized by obesity. Detecting epistasis could thus be a promising approach to understand the effect of simultaneously interacting multiple genetic loci in disease aetiology, beyond single locus effects.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".