pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.23164 · v1 · pith:AMNELYQKnew · submitted 2026-05-22 · 🧬 q-bio.PE

Tread lightly interpreting group differences in genetic risk

Nicole Kleman , Meng Lin , Christopher R. Gignoux , Arslan A. Zaidi This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 02:51 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧬 q-bio.PE
keywords polygenic riskgenetic group differencespopulation structureancestrypolygenic scoresphenotypic differencesstatistical bias
0
0 comments X

The pith

Group differences in genetic risk are difficult to distinguish from statistical artifacts.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper reviews methods for detecting whether human populations differ in their mean genetic values for traits. Top-down methods measure how much ancestry explains phenotypic variance, while bottom-up methods compare polygenic scores across groups. Both are hampered by population structure, ascertainment bias, and poor cross-ancestry portability of scores. Phenotypic differences may arise from measurement bias or varying study designs rather than genetics. The conclusion is that such claims need considerable caution.

Core claim

Populations may show allele frequency differences without corresponding differences in mean genetic value. Neither top-down quantification of ancestry's contribution to phenotypic variance nor bottom-up comparison of polygenic scores reliably separates true genetic differences from artifacts like population structure, ascertainment bias, and portability issues. Phenotypic shifts can also reflect measurement bias and study design heterogeneity instead of genetic factors. Claims about group differences in genetic risk therefore warrant considerable caution.

What carries the argument

Top-down approaches quantifying ancestry's share of phenotypic variance and bottom-up approaches comparing polygenic scores across groups, both limited by statistical artifacts.

Load-bearing premise

That artifacts like population structure, ascertainment bias, portability problems, measurement bias, and study design heterogeneity are pervasive enough to make all claims of group genetic differences unreliable without special caution.

What would settle it

Demonstration of a trait where ancestry variance and polygenic scores both indicate genetic differences after explicit correction for population structure, ascertainment, and portability, with phenotypes measured consistently across groups.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.23164 by Arslan A. Zaidi, Christopher R. Gignoux, Meng Lin, Nicole Kleman.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The expected genetic value for a trait under different evolutionary scenarios. Simulations of two populations that split from an ancestral population (t = 0) after 1,000 generations (t) for traits under neutral evolution (a, b), stabilizing selection (c, d) and divergent selection (e, f). (a, c, e) Populations’ genetic values at generation 1,000, ordered on the y-axis by the magnitude of the difference of … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Relationship between genetic similarity to Africans and 657 binary health-related traits among admixed African Americans. The data are from [72] generated under the follow￾ing model: logit(π) = β0 + β1sex + β2age + β3age2 + β4nuclear ancestry + β5mtDNA haplogroup + β6mtDNA haplogroup × nuclear ancestry. The traits (y-axis) are ordered by the effect of nuclear ances￾try (x-axis) represented as odds ratio on… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Distribution of a skin pigmentation score across continental groups prior to and after ancestry calibration (PGS002110 [54, 36]). Samples are from 1000 Genomes Project (high coverage [11]). Scores are shown in uncalibrated raw values (left) and after ancestry calibration of both mean and variance using first 5 PCs (right). 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Observed differences in mean phenotypic values across human groups have attracted renewed interest with the rise of large-scale genomic studies and polygenic risk prediction. However, the genetic basis of these differences is far more difficult to establish than is often appreciated. Populations can diverge in allele frequency differences without diverging in mean genetic value. Empirical approaches to infer whether populations differ in mean genetic value fall under two broad categories: top-down approaches, which quantify the proportion of phenotypic variance explained by ancestry and bottom-up approaches, which compare polygenic scores across groups. However, both approaches have limitations that prevent them from reliably distinguishing true differences in genetic apart from statistical artifacts like population structure, ascertainment bias, and poor cross-ancestry portability. Further, observed phenotypic shifts between populations may reflect bias in phenotype measurement and heterogeneity in study design rather than underlying genetic drivers. We argue that claims about group differences in genetic risk should be interpreted with considerable caution.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript is a perspective piece arguing that observed mean phenotypic differences across human groups cannot be reliably attributed to underlying genetic differences. It identifies two main empirical strategies—top-down approaches that partition phenotypic variance by ancestry and bottom-up approaches that compare polygenic risk scores (PRS) across groups—and contends that both are undermined by artifacts including population structure, ascertainment bias, and poor cross-ancestry portability of scores. The paper further notes that apparent phenotypic shifts may arise from measurement bias or heterogeneity in study design rather than genetic drivers, and concludes that claims of group differences in genetic risk should be interpreted with considerable caution.

Significance. If the listed limitations are as pervasive as described, the perspective usefully synthesizes established population-genetics concerns for a broader audience and may help temper overinterpretation of ancestry-stratified PRS results. The argument rests on domain knowledge rather than new derivations or simulations, so its value lies in framing rather than in novel technical contributions.

minor comments (3)
  1. The abstract states that both top-down and bottom-up methods 'have limitations that prevent them from reliably distinguishing true differences,' but does not name the specific sections or cited studies that document the severity of ascertainment bias or portability failure for the PRS case; adding one or two concrete citations in the abstract would strengthen the claim.
  2. The manuscript uses the phrase 'mean genetic value' without an explicit definition or reference to the quantitative-genetics quantity (e.g., breeding value) it intends; a brief parenthetical or footnote in the introduction would remove ambiguity for readers outside the subfield.
  3. No table or figure is referenced in the provided abstract; if the full text contains illustrative examples of portability failure or measurement bias, a small summary table would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their concise and accurate summary of our perspective piece, as well as for the positive assessment of its potential value in synthesizing population-genetics concerns for a broader audience. We note the recommendation for minor revision; however, the report contains no enumerated major comments requiring point-by-point response.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

This is a perspective paper offering methodological caution on inferring group genetic differences. It contains no equations, fitted parameters, predictions, or formal derivations. The central argument rests on established population-genetics artifacts (population structure, ascertainment bias, portability) drawn from domain knowledge rather than any self-referential construction or self-citation chain. No load-bearing step reduces to its own inputs by definition or fit.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper draws on standard population genetics knowledge about allele frequency divergence, linkage disequilibrium, and phenotype measurement without introducing new free parameters, axioms beyond domain standards, or invented entities.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Populations can diverge in allele frequency without diverging in mean genetic value
    Invoked in the abstract as a foundational observation about genetic architecture.
  • domain assumption Top-down and bottom-up methods are the main empirical approaches for inferring mean genetic differences
    Used to frame the discussion of limitations.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5691 in / 1265 out tokens · 19653 ms · 2026-05-25T02:51:32.382341+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

74 extracted references · 74 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    15 years of GWAS discovery: Realizing the promise

    Abdel Abdellaoui, Loic Yengo, et al. “15 years of GWAS discovery: Realizing the promise”. In: American Journal of Human Genetics110 (2 2023), P179–194

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    Correcting for volunteer bias in GWAS increases SNP effect sizes and heritability estimates

    Sjoerd van Alten, Benjamin W. Domingue, et al. “Correcting for volunteer bias in GWAS increases SNP effect sizes and heritability estimates”. In:Nature Communications16 (1 2025), pp. 3578–

    work page 2025

  3. [3]

    Genetic architecture of skin and eye color in an African- European admixed population

    Sandra Beleza, Nicholas A Johnson, et al. “Genetic architecture of skin and eye color in an African- European admixed population.” In:PLoS genetics9 (3 2013). Ed. by Richard A. Spritz, e1003372

    work page 2013

  4. [4]

    Reduced signal for polygenic adaptation of height in UK Biobank

    Jeremy J Berg, Arbel Harpak, et al. “Reduced signal for polygenic adaptation of height in UK Biobank”. In:eLife8 (2019). Ed. by Magnus Nordborg, Mark I McCarthy, et al., e39725

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    A Population Genetic Signal of Polygenic Adaptation

    Jeremy J. Berg and Graham Coop. “A Population Genetic Signal of Polygenic Adaptation”. en. In: PLOS Genetics10.8 (2014), e1004412

    work page 2014

  6. [6]

    Race and Ethnicity in Pulmonary Function Test Interpre- tation:AnOfficialAmericanThoracicSocietyStatement

    Nirav R. Bhakta, Christian Bime, et al. “Race and Ethnicity in Pulmonary Function Test Interpre- tation:AnOfficialAmericanThoracicSocietyStatement”.eng.In:American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine207.8 (2023), pp. 978–995

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Quantifying the susceptibility of polygenic scores to ancestry stratification

    Jennifer Blanc, Walid Mawass, and Jeremy J. Berg. “Quantifying the susceptibility of polygenic scores to ancestry stratification”. In:bioRxiv(2025), p. 2025.12.04.692430. * Develops a theoretical framework for quantifying bias in polygenic scores to pop- ulation stratification in GWAS. While PGS derived from GWAS in diverse cohorts are more susceptibile t...

    work page 2025

  8. [8]

    Race and Genetic Ancestry in Medicine — A Time for Reckoning with Racism

    Luisa N. Borrell, Jennifer R. Elhawary, et al. “Race and Genetic Ancestry in Medicine — A Time for Reckoning with Racism”. In:New England Journal of Medicine384.5 (2021), pp. 474–480. eprint:https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMms2029562

    work page doi:10.1056/nejmms2029562 2021

  9. [9]

    Race, Lung Function, and the Historical Context of Prediction Equations

    Lundy Braun and Ricky Grisson. “Race, Lung Function, and the Historical Context of Prediction Equations”. eng. In:JAMA network open6.6 (2023), e2316128

    work page 2023

  10. [10]

    The Effect of Selection on Genetic Variability

    M G Bulmer. “The Effect of Selection on Genetic Variability”. In:The American Naturalist105.943 (1971), pp. 201–211

    work page 1971

  11. [11]

    High-coverage whole-genome sequencing of the ex- panded 1000 Genomes Project cohort including 602 trios

    Marta Byrska-Bishop, Uday S. Evani, et al. “High-coverage whole-genome sequencing of the ex- panded 1000 Genomes Project cohort including 602 trios”. eng. In:Cell185.18 (2022), 3426– 3440.e19

    work page 2022

  12. [12]

    Defining ethnic and racial differences in osteoporosis and fragility fractures

    Jane A Cauley. “Defining ethnic and racial differences in osteoporosis and fragility fractures”. In: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®469.7 (2011), pp. 1891–1899

    work page 2011

  13. [13]

    Estimating heritability explained by local ancestry and evalu- ating stratification bias in admixture mapping from summary statistics

    Tsz Fung Chan, Xinyue Rui, et al. “Estimating heritability explained by local ancestry and evalu- ating stratification bias in admixture mapping from summary statistics”. In:The American Journal of Human Genetics110 (2023), pp. 1853–1862. 10

    work page 2023

  14. [14]

    Second-generation PLINK: rising to the challenge of larger and richer datasets

    Christopher C Chang, Carson C Chow, et al. “Second-generation PLINK: rising to the challenge of larger and richer datasets”. In:Gigascience4.1 (2015), s13742–015

    work page 2015

  15. [15]

    Reading tea leaves? Polygenic scores and differences in traits among groups

    Graham Coop. “Reading tea leaves? Polygenic scores and differences in traits among groups”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.00892(2019)

    work page arXiv 1909

  16. [16]

    Loci associated with skin pigmentation identified in African populations

    Nicholas G. Crawford, Derek E. Kelly, et al. “Loci associated with skin pigmentation identified in African populations”. In:Science358 (6365 2017), eaan8433

    work page 2017

  17. [17]

    Putting polygenic scores in context: How intersectional factors affect relative and absolute genetic risk

    Mihael Cudic, Justin D. Tubbs, et al. “Putting polygenic scores in context: How intersectional factors affect relative and absolute genetic risk”. In:The American Journal of Human Genetics (2026). * The authors demonstrate that polygenic scores perform differently depending on sociodemographic characteristics. Genetic risk estimates varied substantially a...

    work page 2026

  18. [18]

    A Unifying Approach for GFR Estimation: Recommen- dations of the NKF-ASN Task Force on Reassessing the Inclusion of Race in Diagnosing Kidney Disease

    Cynthia Delgado, Mukta Baweja, et al. “A Unifying Approach for GFR Estimation: Recommen- dations of the NKF-ASN Task Force on Reassessing the Inclusion of Race in Diagnosing Kidney Disease”. eng. In:Journal of the American Society of Nephrology: JASN32.12 (2021), pp. 2994– 3015

    work page 2021

  19. [19]

    Polygenic scoring accuracy varies across the genetic ancestry continuum

    Yi Ding, Kangcheng Hou, et al. “Polygenic scoring accuracy varies across the genetic ancestry continuum”. en. In:Nature618.7966 (2023), pp. 774–781

    work page 2023

  20. [20]

    A General Model of the Relationship between the Apportion- ment of Human Genetic Diversity and the Apportionment of Human Phenotypic Diversity

    Michael Edge and Noah Rosenberg. “A General Model of the Relationship between the Apportion- ment of Human Genetic Diversity and the Apportionment of Human Phenotypic Diversity”. In: Human Biology87 (4 2016)

    work page 2016

  21. [21]

    Racial differences and disparities in cancer care and outcomes: where’s the rub?

    Nestor F. Esnaola and Marvella E. Ford. “Racial differences and disparities in cancer care and outcomes: where’s the rub?” eng. In:Surgical Oncology Clinics of North America21.3 (2012), pp. 417–437, viii

    work page 2012

  22. [22]

    The heritability hang-up

    M. W. Feldman and R. C. Lewontin. “The heritability hang-up”. In:Science190 (4220 1975), pp. 1163–1168

    work page 1975

  23. [23]

    Development and validation of a trans-ancestry polygenic risk score for type 2 diabetes in diverse populations

    Tian Ge, Marguerite R. Irvin, et al. “Development and validation of a trans-ancestry polygenic risk score for type 2 diabetes in diverse populations”. en. In:Genome Medicine14.1 (2022), p. 70

    work page 2022

  24. [24]

    Association of Trypanolytic ApoL1 Variants with Kidney Disease in African Americans

    Giulio Genovese, David J. Friedman, et al. “Association of Trypanolytic ApoL1 Variants with Kidney Disease in African Americans”. In:Science329.5993 (2010), pp. 841–845

    work page 2010

  25. [25]

    SLiM 5: Eco-evolutionary simulations across multiple chromosomes and full genomes

    Benjamin C. Haller, Peter L. Ralph, and Philipp W. Messer. “SLiM 5: Eco-evolutionary simulations across multiple chromosomes and full genomes”. In:bioRxiv(2025)

    work page 2025

  26. [26]

    Theevolutionofgroupdifferencesinchangingenvironments

    ArbelHarpakandMollyPrzeworski.“Theevolutionofgroupdifferencesinchangingenvironments”. In:PLoS Biology19.1 (2021), e3001072. 11

    work page 2021

  27. [27]

    Racial bias in pain assessment and treatment rec- ommendations, and false beliefs about biological differences between blacks and whites

    Kelly M. Hoffman, Sophie Trawalter, et al. “Racial bias in pain assessment and treatment rec- ommendations, and false beliefs about biological differences between blacks and whites”. eng. In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America113.16 (2016), pp. 4296–4301

    work page 2016

  28. [28]

    Calibrated prediction intervals for polygenic scores across diverse contexts

    Kangcheng Hou, Ziqi Xu, et al. “Calibrated prediction intervals for polygenic scores across diverse contexts”. In:Nature Genetics 2024 56:756 (7 2024), pp. 1386–1396. * Shows that PGS accuracy varies substantially across contexts – including age, sex, and income – with these factors affecting prediction accuracy comparably to ances- try. Introduces CalPre...

    work page 2024

  29. [29]

    Variations in racial and ethnic groups’ trust in researchers associated with willingness to participate in research

    William T. Hu, Stephanie M. Bergren, et al. “Variations in racial and ethnic groups’ trust in researchers associated with willingness to participate in research”. eng. In:Humanities & Social Sciences Communications10 (2023), p. 466

    work page 2023

  30. [30]

    Interpreting SNP heritability in admixed populations

    Jinguo Huang, Nicole Kleman, et al. “Interpreting SNP heritability in admixed populations”. In: Genetics230.4 (2025), iyaf100. * This paper shows that current methods of heritability estimation do not capture the component of genetic risk that varies between groups or as a function of ancestry in admixed populations

    work page 2025

  31. [31]

    Genome-wide polygenic score to predict chronic kidney disease across ancestries

    Atlas Khan, Michael C. Turchin, et al. “Genome-wide polygenic score to predict chronic kidney disease across ancestries”. en. In:Nature Medicine28.7 (2022), pp. 1412–1420

    work page 2022

  32. [32]

    Exome sequencing and analysis of 44,028 British South Asians enriched for high autozygosity

    Hye In Kim, Christopher DeBoever, et al. “Exome sequencing and analysis of 44,028 British South Asians enriched for high autozygosity”. In:Nature Genetics(2026)

    work page 2026

  33. [33]

    Skin deep: The decoupling of genetic admixture levels from phenotypes that differed between source populations

    Jaehee Kim, Michael D. Edge, et al. “Skin deep: The decoupling of genetic admixture levels from phenotypes that differed between source populations”. In:American Journal of Physical Anthro- pology175 (2 2021), pp. 406–421

    work page 2021

  34. [34]

    Genetic disease risks can be misestimated across global populations

    Michelle S. Kim, Kane P. Patel, et al. “Genetic disease risks can be misestimated across global populations”. In:Genome Biology 2018 19:119 (1 2018), pp. 179–

    work page 2018

  35. [35]

    Genetics: SLC24A5, a putative cation exchanger, affects pigmentation in zebrafish and humans

    Rebecca L. Lamason, Manzoor Ali P.K. Mohideen, et al. “Genetics: SLC24A5, a putative cation exchanger, affects pigmentation in zebrafish and humans”. In:Science310 (5755 2005), pp. 1782– 1786

    work page 2005

  36. [36]

    The Polygenic Score Catalog as an open database for reproducibility and systematic evaluation

    Samuel A. Lambert, Laurent Gil, et al. “The Polygenic Score Catalog as an open database for reproducibility and systematic evaluation”. en. In:Nature Genetics53.4 (2021), pp. 420–425

    work page 2021

  37. [37]

    Enhancing the Polygenic Score Catalog with tools for score calculation and ancestry normalization

    Samuel A. Lambert, Benjamin Wingfield, et al. “Enhancing the Polygenic Score Catalog with tools for score calculation and ancestry normalization”. en. In:Nature Genetics56.10 (2024), pp. 1989– 1994

    work page 2024

  38. [38]

    Assessment of Racial Disparities in Primary Care Physician Specialty Referrals

    Bruce E. Landon, Jukka-Pekka Onnela, et al. “Assessment of Racial Disparities in Primary Care Physician Specialty Referrals”. eng. In:JAMA network open4.1 (2021), e2029238. 12

    work page 2021

  39. [39]

    Racial Inequities, Multiple Sclerosis, and Implemen- tation of a Novel Treatment Algorithm at the Health System Level

    Annette Langer-Gould, Bonnie H. Li, et al. “Racial Inequities, Multiple Sclerosis, and Implemen- tation of a Novel Treatment Algorithm at the Health System Level”. eng. In:Neurology104.10 (2025), e213607. * This study examined whether a health system-level algorithm designed to increase use of efficacious treatments improved outcomes equitably across mult...

    work page 2025

  40. [40]

    Differentiation of allelic frequencies at quantitative trait loci affecting locally adaptive traits

    Robert G. Latta. “Differentiation of allelic frequencies at quantitative trait loci affecting locally adaptive traits”. In:American Naturalist151.3 (1998), pp. 283–292

    work page 1998

  41. [41]

    Selection, optimization and validation of ten chronic disease polygenic risk scores for clinical implementation in diverse US populations

    Niall J. Lennon, Leah C. Kottyan, et al. “Selection, optimization and validation of ten chronic disease polygenic risk scores for clinical implementation in diverse US populations”. en. In:Nature Medicine30.2 (2024), pp. 480–487

    work page 2024

  42. [42]

    Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, Inc, 1998, pp

    Michael Lynch and Bruce Walsh.Genetics and analysis of quantitative traits. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, Inc, 1998, pp. 1–980

    work page 1998

  43. [43]

    Finding the missing heritability of complex diseases

    Teri A. Manolio, Francis S. Collins, et al. “Finding the missing heritability of complex diseases”. en. In:Nature461.7265 (2009), pp. 747–753

    work page 2009

  44. [44]

    Low-coverage sequencing cost-effectively detects known and novel variation in underrepresented populations

    Alicia R Martin, Elizabeth G Atkinson, et al. “Low-coverage sequencing cost-effectively detects known and novel variation in underrepresented populations”. In:The American Journal of Human Genetics108.4 (2021), pp. 656–668

    work page 2021

  45. [45]

    Human Demographic History Impacts Genetic RiskPredictionacrossDiversePopulations

    Alicia R. Martin, Christopher R. Gignoux, et al. “Human Demographic History Impacts Genetic RiskPredictionacrossDiversePopulations”. English.In:The American Journal of Human Genetics 100.4 (2017), pp. 635–649

    work page 2017

  46. [46]

    Clinical use of current polygenic risk scores may exacer- bate health disparities

    Alicia R. Martin, Masahiro Kanai, et al. “Clinical use of current polygenic risk scores may exacer- bate health disparities”. en. In:Nature Genetics51.4 (2019), pp. 584–591

    work page 2019

  47. [47]

    An Unexpectedly Complex Architecture for Skin Pigmentation in Africans

    Alicia R. Martin, Meng Lin, et al. “An Unexpectedly Complex Architecture for Skin Pigmentation in Africans”. In:Cell171 (6 2017), 1340–1353.e14

    work page 2017

  48. [48]

    The omnigenic model and polygenic prediction of complex traits

    Iain Mathieson. “The omnigenic model and polygenic prediction of complex traits”. English. In: The American Journal of Human Genetics108.9 (2021), pp. 1558–1563

    work page 2021

  49. [49]

    Genome-wide patterns of selection in 230 ancient Eurasians

    Iain Mathieson, Iosif Lazaridis, et al. “Genome-wide patterns of selection in 230 ancient Eurasians”. In:Nature 2015 528:7583528 (7583 2015), pp. 499–503

    work page 2015

  50. [50]

    Variable prediction accuracy of polygenic scores within an ancestry group

    Hakhamanesh Mostafavi, Arbel Harpak, et al. “Variable prediction accuracy of polygenic scores within an ancestry group”. In:elife9 (2020), e48376

    work page 2020

  51. [51]

    Admixture Mapping of White Cell Count: Genetic Locus Responsible for Lower White Blood Cell Count in the Health ABC and Jackson Heart Studies

    Michael A. Nalls, James G. Wilson, et al. “Admixture Mapping of White Cell Count: Genetic Locus Responsible for Lower White Blood Cell Count in the Health ABC and Jackson Heart Studies”. In:The American Journal of Human Genetics82 (2008), pp. 81–87

    work page 2008

  52. [52]

    Tread Lightly Interpreting Polygenic Tests of Selection

    John Novembre and Nicholas H. Barton. “Tread Lightly Interpreting Polygenic Tests of Selection”. en. In:Genetics208.4 (2018), pp. 1351–1355. 13

    work page 2018

  53. [53]

    The Genetics of Human Adap- tation: Hard Sweeps, Soft Sweeps, and Polygenic Adaptation

    Jonathan K. Pritchard, Joseph K. Pickrell, and Graham Coop. “The Genetics of Human Adap- tation: Hard Sweeps, Soft Sweeps, and Polygenic Adaptation”. In:Current Biology20.4 (2010), pp. 208–15

    work page 2010

  54. [54]

    Portability of 245 polygenic scores when derived from the UK Biobank and applied to 9 ancestry groups from the same cohort

    Florian Privé, Hugues Aschard, et al. “Portability of 245 polygenic scores when derived from the UK Biobank and applied to 9 ancestry groups from the same cohort”. In:The American Journal of Human Genetics109.1 (2022), pp. 12–23

    work page 2022

  55. [55]

    PLINK: a tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses

    Shaun Purcell, Benjamin Neale, et al. “PLINK: a tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses.” In:American journal of human genetics81.3 (2007), pp. 559– 75

    work page 2007

  56. [56]

    R Foundation for Sta- tistical Computing

    R Core Team.R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Sta- tistical Computing. Vienna, Austria, 2023

    work page 2023

  57. [57]

    David Reich.Opinion | How Genetics Is Changing Our Understanding of ’Race’. 2018

    work page 2018

  58. [58]

    Categorization of humans in biomedical research: genes, race and disease

    Neil Risch, Esteban Burchard, et al. “Categorization of humans in biomedical research: genes, race and disease”. In:Genome biology3 (7 2002), comment2007.1

    work page 2002

  59. [59]

    Interpreting polygenic scores, polygenic adaptation, and human phenotypic differences

    Noah A. Rosenberg, Michael D. Edge, et al. “Interpreting polygenic scores, polygenic adaptation, and human phenotypic differences”. In:Evolution, Medicine and Public Health2019 (1 2019)

    work page 2019

  60. [60]

    Heritabilitywithingroups isuninformativeabout differ- ences among groups: Cases from behavioral, evolutionary, and statistical genetics

    Joshua G.Schraiberand MichaelD.Edge. “Heritabilitywithingroups isuninformativeabout differ- ences among groups: Cases from behavioral, evolutionary, and statistical genetics”. In:Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America121 (12 2024), e2319496121. * This paper shows that within-population heritability cannot be used t...

    work page 2024

  61. [61]

    Phenotypic variance explained by local ancestry in admixed African Americans

    Daniel Shriner, Amy R. Bentley, et al. “Phenotypic variance explained by local ancestry in admixed African Americans”. In:Frontiers in Genetics6 (2015), p. 324

    work page 2015

  62. [62]

    The deleterious mutation load is insensitive to recent population history

    Yuval B Simons, Michael C Turchin, et al. “The deleterious mutation load is insensitive to recent population history”. In:Nature Genetics46 (3 2014), pp. 220–224

    work page 2014

  63. [63]

    The impact of recent population history on the deleterious mutation load in humans and close evolutionary relatives

    Yuval B. Simons and Guy Sella. “The impact of recent population history on the deleterious mutation load in humans and close evolutionary relatives”. In:Current Opinion in Genetics and Development41 (2016), pp. 150–158

    work page 2016

  64. [64]

    Polygenic adaptation on height is overestimated due to uncorrected stratification in genome-wide association studies

    Mashaal Sohail, Robert M. Maier, et al. “Polygenic adaptation on height is overestimated due to uncorrected stratification in genome-wide association studies”. In:eLife8 (2019), e39702

    work page 2019

  65. [65]

    The distribution of highly deleterious variants across human ancestry groups

    Anastasia Stolyarova, Graham Coop, and Molly Przeworski. “The distribution of highly deleterious variants across human ancestry groups”. In:Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America122.21 (2025), e2503857122. * Shows that highly deleterious mutations (e..g protein loss of function) occur at simiarly low allele frequen...

    work page 2025

  66. [66]

    The “All of Us

    The All of Us Research Program Investigators. “The “All of Us” Research Program”. In:New England Journal of Medicine381 (7 2019), pp. 668–676

    work page 2019

  67. [67]

    One hundred years into the study of ecotypes, new advances are being made through large-scale field experiments in perennial plant systems

    Acer VanWallendael, David B. Lowry, and Jill A. Hamilton. “One hundred years into the study of ecotypes, new advances are being made through large-scale field experiments in perennial plant systems”. In:Current Opinion in Plant Biology66 (2022), p. 102152

    work page 2022

  68. [68]

    Imputation-aware tag SNP selection to improve power for large-scale, multi-ethnic association studies

    Genevieve L Wojcik, Christian Fuchsberger, et al. “Imputation-aware tag SNP selection to improve power for large-scale, multi-ethnic association studies”. In:G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics8.10 (2018), pp. 3255–3267

    work page 2018

  69. [69]

    Contribution of Major Diseases to Disparities in Mortality

    Mitchell D. Wong, Martin F. Shapiro, et al. “Contribution of Major Diseases to Disparities in Mortality”. In:New England Journal of Medicine347 (20 2002), pp. 1585–1592

    work page 2002

  70. [70]

    Demographic history mediates the effect of stratification on polygenic scores

    Arslan A Zaidi and Iain Mathieson. “Demographic history mediates the effect of stratification on polygenic scores”. In:eLife9 (2020). Ed. by George H Perry, Michael C Turchin, and Alicia R Martin, e61548

    work page 2020

  71. [71]

    Investigating the case of human nose shape and climate adaptation

    Arslan A. Zaidi, Brooke C. Mattern, et al. “Investigating the case of human nose shape and climate adaptation”. In:PLoS Genetics13 (3 2017), p. 2017

    work page 2017

  72. [72]

    The genetic and phenotypic correlates of mtDNA copy number in a multi-ancestry cohort

    Arslan A. Zaidi, Anurag Verma, et al. “The genetic and phenotypic correlates of mtDNA copy number in a multi-ancestry cohort”. In:Human Genetics and Genomics Advances4 (3 2023), p. 100202

    work page 2023

  73. [73]

    The Effects of Migration and Assortative Mating on Ad- mixture Linkage Disequilibrium

    Noah Zaitlen, Scott Huntsman, et al. “The Effects of Migration and Assortative Mating on Ad- mixture Linkage Disequilibrium”. In:Genetics205 (1 2017), pp. 375–383

    work page 2017

  74. [74]

    Leveraging population admixture to characterize the heri- tability of complex traits

    Noah Zaitlen, Bogdan Pasaniuc, et al. “Leveraging population admixture to characterize the heri- tability of complex traits”. In:Nature Genetics46 (12 2014), pp. 1356–1362. 15 Supplement Methods Simulations for expected genetic values:Using SLiM [25], we simulate a polygenic trait forward in time under neutral evolution, stabilizing selection, and diverge...

    work page arXiv 2014