4.6 Article

Transferability and Fine-Mapping of Genome-Wide Associated Loci for Adult Height across Human Populations

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 4, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0008398

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [S06GM008016-320107, S06GM008016-380111, 2M01RR010284]
  2. Center for Research on Genomics and Global Health, National Human Genome Research Institute, National Institutes of Health [Z01HG200362]
  3. Coriell Institute

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Human height is the prototypical polygenic quantitative trait. Recently, several genetic variants influencing adult height were identified, primarily in individuals of East Asian (Chinese Han or Korean) or European ancestry. Here, we examined 152 genetic variants representing 107 independent loci previously associated with adult height for transferability in a well-powered sample of 1,016 unrelated African Americans. When we tested just the reported variants originally identified as associated with adult height in individuals of East Asian or European ancestry, only 8.3% of these loci transferred (p-values <= 0.05 under an additive genetic model with directionally consistent effects) to our African American sample. However, when we comprehensively evaluated all HapMap variants in linkage disequilibrium (r(2) >= 0.3) with the reported variants, the transferability rate increased to 54.1%. The transferability rate was 70.8% for associations originally reported as genome-wide significant and 38.0% for associations originally reported as suggestive. An additional 23 loci were significantly associated but failed to transfer because of directionally inconsistent effects. Six loci were associated with adult height in all three groups. Using differences in linkage disequilibrium patterns between HapMap CEU or CHB reference data and our African American sample, we fine-mapped these six loci, improving both the localization and the annotation of these transferable associations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据