A sibling study of variation in parental mutation rates
Getseva, V.; Poyraz, P.; Stolyarova, A.; Agarwal, I.; Przeworski, M.
Show abstract
People are born with variable numbers of de novo germline mutations (DNMs), depending primarily on the ages of their parents. To explore additional causes, we developed an approach to call DNMs from nucleotide differences between siblings in genomic regions inherited identical by descent from both parents. Applying it to whole genome sequences from 28,985 sibling pairs of diverse genetic ancestries present in the UK Biobank and All of Us datasets, as well as 2,330 trios, we identified >800K autosomal DNMs and characterized mutation phenotypes in 27,645 sets of parents. We found subtle shifts in the mutation spectrum but no differences in total DNM rates among genetic ancestry groups, or between smokers and non-smokers. Testing for associations between parental mutation phenotypes and their burden of loss-of-function and deleterious missense variants in a set of 180 DNA repair and maintenance genes, we discovered that disruptions in REV1 and LIG1 increase germline mutation rates, and thus that rare mutator alleles segregate in population cohorts.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Identity-by-descent detection across 487,409 British samples reveals fine-scale population structure, evolutionary history, and trait associations 96%
- Transgenerational transmission of post-zygotic mutations suggests symmetric contribution of first two blastomeres to human germline 96%
- Parent-of-origin effects in the UK Biobank 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Demographic history impacts stratification in polygenic scores 96%
- Large, three-generation CEPH families reveal post-zygotic mosaicism and variability in germline mutation accumulation 95%
- A paternal bias in germline mutation is widespread in amniotes and can arise independently of cell divisions 95%
"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.