MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391676835 · doi:10.1038/s41467-024-45407-8

A method to estimate the contribution of rare coding variants to complex trait heritability

2024· article· en· W4391676835 on OpenAlexafffund
Nazia Pathan, Wei Q. Deng, Matteo Di Scipio, Mohammad Daud Khan, Shihong Mao, Robert W. Morton, Ricky Lali, Marie Pigeyre, Michael Chong, Guillaume Paré

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsThrombosis and Atherosclerosis Research InstituteImpactSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonHamilton Health SciencesMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsHeritabilityMissing heritability problemTraitBiologyGenetic architectureGeneticsQuantitative trait locusGeneIn silicoGenotypeSingle-nucleotide polymorphismComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract It has been postulated that rare coding variants (RVs; MAF < 0.01) contribute to the “missing” heritability of complex traits. We developed a framework, the Rare variant heritability (RARity) estimator, to assess RV heritability ( h 2 RV ) without assuming a particular genetic architecture. We applied RARity to 31 complex traits in the UK Biobank ( n = 167,348) and showed that gene-level RV aggregation suffers from 79% (95% CI: 68-93%) loss of h 2 RV . Using unaggregated variants, 27 traits had h 2 RV > 5%, with height having the highest h 2 RV at 21.9% (95% CI: 19.0-24.8%). The total heritability, including common and rare variants, recovered pedigree-based estimates for 11 traits. RARity can estimate gene-level h 2 RV , enabling the assessment of gene-level characteristics and revealing 11, previously unreported, gene-phenotype relationships. Finally, we demonstrated that in silico pathogenicity prediction (variant-level) and gene-level annotations do not generally enrich for RVs that over-contribute to complex trait variance, and thus, innovative methods are needed to predict RV functionality.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.061
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.061
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.373 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations20
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature Communications→Same topicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology→French-language works237,207→