4.7 Article

Geographic and haplotype structure of candidate type 2 diabetes-susceptibility variants at the calpain-10 locus

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS
卷 70, 期 5, 页码 1096-1106

出版社

UNIV CHICAGO PRESS
DOI: 10.1086/339930

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [P60 DK020595, P30 DK020595, DK20595, DK56670, DK47486, R01 DK056670, R01 DK055889, R01 DK047486, DK55889] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIGMS NIH HHS [GM57672, P01 GM057672] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recently, a positional cloning study proposed that haplotypes at the calpain-10 locus (CAPN10) are associated with increased risk of type 2 diabetes, or non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, in Mexican Americans, Finns, and Germans. To inform the interpretation of the original mapping results and to look for evidence for the action of natural selection on CAPN10, we undertook a population-based genotyping survey of the candidate susceptibility variants. First, we genotyped sites 43, 19, and 63 (the haplotype-defining variants previously proposed) and four closely linked SNPs, in 561 individuals from 11 populations from five continents, and we examined the linkage disequilibrium among them. We then examined the ancestral state of these sites by sequencing orthologous portions of CAPN10 in chimpanzee and orangutan (the identity of sites 43 and 19 was further investigated in a limited sample of other great apes and Old World and New World monkeys). Our survey suggests larger-than-expected differences in the distribution of CAPN10 susceptibility variants between African and non-African populations, with common, derived haplotypes in European and Asian samples (including one of two proposed risk haplotypes) being rare or absent in African samples. These results suggest a history of positive natural selection at the locus, resulting in significant geographic differences in polymorphism frequencies. The relationship of these differences to disease risk is discussed.

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

4.7
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