Nearly 700 Genetic Factors Found To Influence Human Adult Height

damn_registrars writes: A consortium of scientists from many different countries reviewed genome-wide association study data sets of over 250,000 individuals in a search for genetic factors that influence adult height. Looking at Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms, the researchers found 697 distinct genetic markers that can explain some 20 percent of the heritability of human adult height. Previous studies had found around 180 such markers, but the larger sample set increased the ability to detect these changes, both within genes and in non-coding regions. Genes found in this set included ones from pathways not previously connected to skeletal growth.

This study is also significant for the sample size, which allows it to address whether the data from such large sets has a tendency to converge or diverge on genetic pathways; this study particularly favors the latter, which is of great utility toward studying other polygenetic conditions in the future. The original paper is likely paywalled, however the abstract is available for free and some of the collaborators behind it have other bits available for free in the meantime.

Comments

hmm

[buddyglass]

As a lay person, that a study involving 250,000 participants could explain only 20% of height heritability seems like a bad sign with respect to the pace at which we're likely unravel our own genetic code.

Re:hmm

[fyngyrz]

I think it seems like a good sign. I took it to imply that there may be more (considerably more) than one way to get a particular result. Blue eyes, strength, intelligence, height, etc.

Just a thought. And I'm fairly cynical, too. :)

Looking forward to the day parents can definitively select for intelligent children.

Not news: GWAS Often Fail

[chesapeake]

To be brutally honest, it's not surprising that yet another genome-wide association study has failed to explain even half of the heritability of a trait / disease / condition.

There's plenty of literature out there arguing whether these studies are a waste of money or not:

* http://blog.goldenhelix.com/?p...
* http://scienceblogs.com/geneti...
* http://gettinggeneticsdone.blo...

I would have been surprised if this study did find the majority of inherited variability in height.

Re:Not news: GWAS Often Fail

[cryptolemur]

Talk about name dropping...:-)

I hope you're not thinking all these authors contributed equally. They did not. I'd venture a (well educated) guess that most of them "merely" had part of the data, and provided that in exhange for a name in publication. Most probably made their undergrads to do the analysis, so they could only share the results for meta analysis, instead of the raw data. So the the undergrads got their names in, too.

Furthermore, all the authors are using the same method (GWAS) so it's only relevant to question that single method, not the smartness off all the authors put together. And it's apparent that even you don't think much of the method, since you require those that challenge it, to come up with the proof (actual genetic/biological/chemical mechanism) that the method provided a correct model of reality. And within a generous week, which, of course, is much less time that it took to churn this statistical model out of the data.

That doens't sound fair, me thinks. It'll take years of wet lab to find out if this model has any relevance to how the world ticks. Computers and undergrads are cheap, labs and professionsal are expensive, so we get a lot of statistical biology nowadays. It's not bad science per se, but it's a very limited approach, because it's (totally) data driven.

size matters

[swell]

The significant thing to note here is that height is important. It wouldn't be studied otherwise. If you want to succeed in politics or upper management or any endeavor in which you are judged by others, you should be tall. Man or woman (but especially men), it makes no difference- you must be tall.

You may be a great scientist or programmer or advertising copywriter, but unless you are tall you won't get credit for your work. It will go to your boss who is tall and doesn't even understand what you do.

Exceptions include Hitler, Napoleon many comedians and malcontents and criminals... You have some in your family, you've seen them on TV. And why do short people act out? Because they feel the pressure that short people feel. They are never accepted, never quite good enough due to their stature. They overcompensate.

When we learn to judge others by their merit, rather than their sometimes obvious 'short'comings, we will prevent many overreactions that lead to crime and worse. Randy Newman was wrong- short people can be just as beneficial to society, just as worthy as tall people.

Re:size matters

[AmiMoJo]

Napoleon was actually of average height for his time. I agree with the rest of what you said.

Re:size matters

[phantomfive]

lol if the world has changed, it has been to make size less important