Genes About a Quarter of the Secret To Staying Smart

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Genes About a Quarter of the Secret To Staying Smart

Posted by samzenpus on Thursday January 19, 2012 @08:42AM from the luck-of-the-draw dept.

ananyo writes "A Scottish intelligence study that began 80 years ago has borne new fruit. Researchers have tracked down the study's surviving participants — who joined the study when they were 11 years old — to estimate the role that our genes have in maintaining intelligence through to old age. After conducting fresh intelligence tests on the surviving participants, the researchers tested the DNA samples they had collected for the presence of more than half a million common genetic variants, each affecting only a single letter in the DNA sequence of the genome. The team then calculated whether these variants were associated with cognitive stability — how well intelligence had been maintained over time. The sample size of 2,000 people was too small to grant the statistical power needed to track down individual genetic signatures associated with cognitive stability. But it was enough to estimate how much genetics contributes to cognitive aging. The team found that these variants accounted for nearly one-quarter of the differences in cognitive stability."

21 of 77 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

So in other words by White+Flame · 2012-01-19 08:47 · Score: 4, Insightful

It's not genetics but other factors, presumably mental exercise, diet, etc that contributes 75% to keeping your intelligence intact as you enter old age?
1. Re:So in other words by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-19 08:52 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Maybe. Or maybe the genetic factors killed off the faster-declining people prior to old age. Based on the summary, I would say that "Among people who survived to old age, genetic factors account for approximately 25% of mental decline."
2. Re:So in other words by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-19 08:55 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Useful for confirmation, but not new or unexpected. The /. history has articles about taxi driver training leading to neural restructuring in favor of mapping and geographical awareness. There are some mentally destructive conditions that we don't know how to prevent yet, but in general, you get good at what you do a lot. If you spend your time hauling heavy boxes, you will get stronger (until you hit a physical limit). If you spend your time solving puzzles, studying new scientific research, and practicing your 24 dimensional calculus, you will get better at those. If you spend all your time watching gossip shows on TV and sitting on the couch, you very well may become one with the couch, mentally and physically.
3. Re:So in other words by cayenne8 · 2012-01-19 09:43 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  My theory was that the other 3/4 was associate with not wasting time and grey matter watching inane, worthless, stupid reality shows on TV 24/7....and actually doing something with their minds into their old age.
  Of course..diet and exercise certainly had to have a lot to do with it too, I'd guess...
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
4. Re:So in other words by jd · 2012-01-19 11:23 · Score: 2
  
  If there are N genes required for intelligence out of a set of M, unless N==M you cannot identify all of N by looking at what is common to everyone. That's a common but problematic flaw in genetic studies. It's also why markers that indicate a propensity for disease can't tell you if you will get that disease. If the studies so far don't map which sets of genetic markers are significant (and what epigenetic states are required to make them significant), this positive indication approach has limited value - at least on its own.
  The "ideal" solution (which would be horribly difficult and expensive, most ideal solutions are) would be to get a very large number of people (smart and otherwise), do a complete decode on the X chromosome (we know that's linked to the brain) and to any regions outside of the X that this and other studies have indicated may be significant. What you want to do is find permutations that exclusively appear in those who are smart (not all smart people would have those permutations but absolutely no person who isn't smart will have them at all - ever). The sheer number of nucleotides you'd need to map would be vast and in order to be able to guarantee that the sets of SNPs and STRs identified were useful, you'd need to study an incredible number of people. Let's say you've a paltry 1,000 SNPs that could be of significance - to get a decent random sample to show up the clusters of SNPs that are important, you'd need 1,000,000 people from as large a genetic sample as possible. You also have to have a totally cross-cultural method of measuring smarts, which is no small task in itself.
  
  --
  It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
5. Re:So in other words by hitmark · 2012-01-19 19:28 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Makes me wonder if one can pull of something similar to that using direct brain stimulation, and so train someone in a similar way to uploading a program.
  
  --
  comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
Superior Genepool? by DontLickJesus · 2012-01-19 08:54 · Score: 2, Interesting

Nazi Science

--
Where genius and insanity become confused true wisdom is found
1. Re:Superior Genepool? by geekoid · 2012-01-19 09:01 · Score: 2
  
  If I could create a pill that change what your DNA expresses so it makes you smarter, and thus improves the Genepool*, is a good thing.
  Doing so by 'weeding out' a class of people is 'Nazi Science' not this.
  *assuming the trait can be passed on.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
2. Re:Superior Genepool? by Beardo+the+Bearded · 2012-01-19 11:05 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Lamarkable.
  
  --
  
  ---
  ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
What it takes to make it to 90? by RossR · 2012-01-19 08:54 · Score: 4, Interesting

Comparing the intelligence and genes of those who did and did not survive to 90 would also be interesting.
"Scottish intelligence study"? by Rogerborg · 2012-01-19 08:56 · Score: 4, Funny

Have they found any yet?

--
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
1. Re:"Scottish intelligence study"? by kae_verens · 2012-01-19 09:07 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  A lot of the modern world was invented by Scots. Maxwell's equations, animal cloning, telephones, trains, televisions, penicillin.
  I guess when you're surrounded by fields and sheep, all you can do is drink or think.
2. Re:"Scottish intelligence study"? by DMUTPeregrine · 2012-01-19 09:18 · Score: 2
  
  They invented Whisky! Sure, that prevented much further advancement, but what other advancement is truly needed?
  
  --
  Not a sentence!
3. Re:"Scottish intelligence study"? by Laxori666 · 2012-01-19 09:22 · Score: 2
  
  A lot of the modern world was invented by Scots. Maxwell's equations, animal cloning, telephones, trains, televisions, penicillin.
  I guess when you're surrounded by fields and sheep, all you can do is drink or think.
  I can think of something else involving the sheep.
*At least* a quarter... by OGmofo · 2012-01-19 08:59 · Score: 4, Interesting

The study only sampled a subset of the genome (certain SNPs), there could be other variations in the genome that contribute even more. We simply can't tell from the study. All we can say is that this study suggests at least a quarter of the variation is explained by the subset of the genotype they have sampled.
1. Re:*At least* a quarter... by Samantha+Wright · 2012-01-19 09:53 · Score: 2
  
  One of the nice things they teach you when you learn about how human SNP linkage analyses (for those of you following along at home: a different test performed on the same data, when it's available for a whole family) are done is that the SNPs are often linked with a whole-gene allele. It's true that there might be more out there, but it's not going to be some surprisingly huge number like 50%. A significant portion of SNPs can be inferred from each other with extremely high reliability, suggesting they're inherited as sets. No, they don't know the exact nucleotide sequences responsible, but they can get a decent idea, especially with this many markers. Hopefully in the near future we'll see SNP surveys completely displaced by whole-exome sequencing.
  
  --
  Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
Comment removed by account_deleted · 2012-01-19 09:01 · Score: 4, Interesting

Comment removed based on user account deletion
Re:Not PC, please suppress by Attack+DAWWG · 2012-01-19 09:07 · Score: 2

It is, however, allowable to (inversely) correlate intelligence with someone's inclination towards setting up straw men.
Re:What about RACE... by P-niiice · 2012-01-19 09:26 · Score: 2

Past studies have found as much variations within "races" as between "races" so it was probably deemed not useful enough. How unfortunate for you.
Don't keep me in suspense! by DarthVain · 2012-01-19 09:37 · Score: 2

What are the other two fifths?
Re:Not PC, please suppress by Guppy · 2012-01-19 11:41 · Score: 2

This research must be purged. [/current state of intelligence debate]
A guy named Dr. Thomas Bouchard did something similar studying fraternal vs. identical twins, and found a genetic contribution of about 75% (for intelligence, not age-related decline in intelligence).
His work is considered one of the landmark studies on the heritability of intelligence. And yes, various groups attempted to suppress his research and get him fired.