Chen Xu, Kuja-Halkola Ralf, Rahman Iffat, Arpegård Johannes, Viktorin Alexander, Karlsson Robert, Hägg Sara, Svensson Per, Pedersen Nancy L, Magnusson Patrik K E
Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm 17177, Sweden.
Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm 17177, Sweden.
Am J Hum Genet. 2015 Nov 5;97(5):708-14. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2015.10.004.
In order to further illuminate the potential role of dominant genetic variation in the "missing heritability" debate, we investigated the additive (narrow-sense heritability, h(2)) and dominant (δ(2)) genetic variance for 18 human complex traits. Within the same study base (10,682 Swedish twins), we calculated and compared the estimates from classic twin-based structural equation model with SNP-based genomic-relatedness-matrix restricted maximum likelihood [GREML(d)] method. Contributions of δ(2) were evident for 14 traits in twin models (average δ(2)twin = 0.25, range 0.14-0.49), two of which also displayed significant δ(2) in the GREMLd analyses (triglycerides δ(2)SNP = 0.28 and waist circumference δ(2)SNP = 0.19). On average, the proportion of h(2)SNP/h(2)twin was 70% for ADE-fitted traits (for which the best-fitting model included additive and dominant genetic and unique environmental components) and 31% for AE-fitted traits (for which the best-fitting model included additive genetic and unique environmental components). Independent evidence for contribution from shared environment, also in ADE-fitted traits, was obtained from self-reported within-pair contact frequency and age at separation. We conclude that despite the fact that additive genetics appear to constitute the bulk of genetic influences for most complex traits, dominant genetic variation might often be masked by shared environment in twin and family studies and might therefore have a more prominent role than what family-based estimates often suggest. The risk of erroneously attributing all inherited genetic influences (additive and dominant) to the h(2) in too-small twin studies might also lead to exaggerated "missing heritability" (the proportion of h(2) that remains unexplained by SNPs).
为了进一步阐明显性基因变异在“遗传性缺失”争论中的潜在作用,我们研究了18种人类复杂性状的加性(狭义遗传力,h(2))和显性(δ(2))遗传方差。在同一研究群体(10682名瑞典双胞胎)中,我们计算并比较了基于经典双胞胎结构方程模型和基于单核苷酸多态性(SNP)的基因组相关矩阵限制最大似然法[GREML(d)]的估计值。在双胞胎模型中,14种性状的δ(2)贡献明显(平均δ(2)双胞胎 = 0.25,范围为0.14 - 0.49),其中两种性状在GREMLd分析中也显示出显著的δ(2)(甘油三酯δ(2)SNP = 0.28,腰围δ(2)SNP = 0.19)。对于ADE拟合性状(最佳拟合模型包括加性和显性遗传以及独特环境成分),h(2)SNP/h(2)双胞胎的平均比例为70%,对于AE拟合性状(最佳拟合模型包括加性遗传和独特环境成分),该比例为31%。从自我报告的双胞胎对内接触频率和分开年龄中,我们获得了共享环境贡献的独立证据,这在ADE拟合性状中也是如此。我们得出结论,尽管加性遗传似乎构成了大多数复杂性状遗传影响的主体,但在双胞胎和家庭研究中,显性基因变异可能经常被共享环境所掩盖,因此可能比基于家庭的估计所表明的作用更为突出。在样本量过小的双胞胎研究中,错误地将所有遗传影响(加性和显性)都归因于h(2)的风险,也可能导致夸大的“遗传性缺失”(SNP无法解释的h(2)比例)。