MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394881449 · doi:10.1101/2024.04.16.589618

Effects of gene dosage on cognitive ability: A function-based association study across brain and non-brain processes

2024· preprint· en· W4394881449 on OpenAlexafffund
Guillaume Huguet, Thomas Renne, Cécile Poulain, Alma Dubuc, Kuldeep Kumar, Sayeh Kazem, Worrawat Engchuan, Omar Shanta, Élise Douard, Catherine Proulx, Martineau Jean‐Louis, Zohra Saci, Josephine Mollon, Laura M. Schultz, Emma EM Knowles, Simon R. Cox, David J. Porteous, Gail Davies, Paul Redmond, Sarah E. Harris, Günter Schumann, Guillaume Dumas, Aurélie Labbe, Zdenka Pausová, Tomáš Paus, Stephen W. Scherer, Jonathan Sebat, Laura Almasy, David C. Glahn, Sébastien Jacquemont

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Canadian institutionsHEC MontréalHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversité de MontréalSickKids FoundationCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
FundersEconomic and Social Research CouncilCompute CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDirectorate for Biological SciencesNational Institutes of HealthHeart and Stroke Foundation of CanadaHospital for Sick ChildrenWellcome TrustFondation Brain CanadaAge UKBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilSimons Foundation Autism Research InitiativeAutism Speaks
KeywordsCopy-number variationGene duplicationCognitionGenome-wide association studyBiologyGene dosagePopulationGeneGeneticsPsychologyNeuroscienceGene expressionMedicineGenomeSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Genomic Copy Number Variants (CNVs) that increase risk for neurodevelopmental disorders are also associated with lower cognitive ability in general population cohorts. Studies have focussed on a small set of recurrent CNVs, but burden analyses suggested that the vast majority of CNVs affecting cognitive ability are too rare to reach variant-level association. As a result, the full range of gene-dosage-sensitive biological processes linked to cognitive ability remains unknown. To investigate this issue, we identified all CNVs >50 kilobases in 258k individuals from 6 general population cohorts with assessments of general cognitive abilities. We performed a CNV-GWAS and functional burden analyses, which tested 6502 gene-sets defined by tissue and cell-type transcriptomics as well as gene ontology disrupted by all rare coding CNVs. CNV-GWAS identified a novel duplication at 2q12.3 associated with higher performance in cognitive ability. Among the 864 gene-sets associated with cognitive ability, only 11% showed significant effects for both deletions and duplication. Accordingly, we systematically observed negative correlations between deletion and duplication effect sizes across all levels of biological observations. We quantified the preferential effects of deletions versus duplication using tagDS, a new normalized metric. Cognitive ability was preferentially affected by cortical, presynaptic, and negative-regulation gene-sets when duplicated. In contrast, preferential effects of deletions were observed for subcortical, post-synaptic, and positive-regulation gene-sets. A large proportion of gene-sets assigned to non-brain organs were associated with cognitive ability due to low tissue specificity genes, which were associated with higher sensitive to haploinsufficiency. Overall, most biological functions associated with cognitive ability are divided into those sensitive to either deletion or duplications.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesFrench-language works237,207