Back

Genetic Nurture: Estimating the direct genetic effects of pediatric anthropometric traits

Ghatan, S.; de Vries, J.; Pingault, J.-B.; Jaddoe, V. W. V.; Cecil, C. A. M.; Felix, J.; Rivadeneria, F.; Medina-Gomez, C.

2024-12-11 genetic and genomic medicine
10.1101/2024.12.10.24318796 medRxiv
Show abstract

Parental genetic variants can indirectly influence the traits of their child through the environment, a concept termed "genetic nurture", or indirect genetic effects (IGE). This study estimated the direct genetic effects (DGE), via direct allelic transmission, and IGE shaping height, body mass index (BMI), and bone mineral density (BMD) in a multi-ethnic Dutch pediatric cohort, examining children with repeated measurements at ages six, nine, and thirteen. We imputed missing parental alleles from the phased haplotypes of 1,931,478 variants (MAF >1%), utilizing snipar (single nucleotide imputation of parents). We constructed polygenic risk scores (PRSs) and jointly regressed the probands trait on their own PRS, while controlling for the probands maternal and paternal PRSs. A total of 4,488 probands, with genetic data, underwent at least one of the three specified measurements. We found statistically significant DGE estimates for the three traits across ages six, nine and thirteen. For instance, 71-77% of the BMI variance explained by the BMI-PRS can be attributed solely to the DGE. IGE estimates reached significance only for BMI measured at ages nine (Beta: 0.05, 95%CI: 0.01-0.09) and thirteen (Beta: 0.05, 95%CI: 0.01-0.09). Maternal and paternal IGE were of a similar magnitude in all our analyses. Our findings indicate that genetic nurture has limited influence on anthropometric traits during formative years. In addition, we do not observe differences between the maternal and paternal indirect contributions to these traits, opposite to the stronger maternal nurturing effect reported for other traits.

Published in Human Molecular Genetics (predicted rank #2) · training set

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.