ArticlePLoS biology2024
Unifying approaches from statistical genetics and phylogenetics for mapping phenotypes in structured populations.
Article in PLoS biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Observational epidemiological studies can mitigate genetic confounding with a genetic relatedness matrix.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Genetic prediction with ARG-powered linear algebra.Genetics · 2026Article
- Quantifying direct genetic signal captured by principal component adjustment.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- On ARGs, pedigrees, and genetic relatedness matrices.Genetics · 2026Article
- Multivariate trait evolution: models for the evolution of the quantitative geneticEvolution letters · 2025Article
- Robust regression rescues poor phylogenetic decisions.BMC ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- From Trees to Traits: A Review of Advances in PhyloG2P Methods and Future Directions.Genome biology and evolution · 2025Review
- A method for identifying local adaptation in structured populations.PLoS genetics · 2025Article
- A genealogy-based approach for revealing ancestry-specific structures in admixed populations.American journal of human genetics · 2025Article
- Review
- Convergent expansions of keystone gene families drive metabolic innovation in Saccharomycotina yeasts.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Article
- Error rates in QST-FST comparisons depend on genetic architecture and estimation procedures.Genetics · 2025Article
- A Tale of Too Many Trees: A Conundrum for Phylogenetic Regression.Molecular biology and evolution · 2025Article
- On ARGs, pedigrees, and genetic relatedness matrices.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- A Litmus Test for Confounding in Polygenic Scores.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Error rates inbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- The Meaning and Measure of Concordance Factors in Phylogenomics.Molecular biology and evolution · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In both statistical genetics and phylogenetics, a major goal is to identify correlations between genetic loci or other aspects of the phenotype or environment and a focal trait. In these 2 fields, there are sophisticated but disparate statistical traditions aimed at these tasks. The disconnect between their respective approaches is becoming untenable as questions in medicine, conservation biology, and evolutionary biology increasingly rely on integrating data from within and among species, and once-clear conceptual divisions are becoming increasingly blurred. To help bridge this divide, we lay out a general model describing the covariance between the genetic contributions to the quantitative phenotypes of different individuals. Taking this approach shows that standard models in both statistical genetics (e.g., genome-wide association studies; GWAS) and phylogenetic comparative biology (e.g., phylogenetic regression) can be interpreted as special cases of this more general quantitative-genetic model. The fact that these models share the same core architecture means that we can build a unified understanding of the strengths and limitations of different methods for controlling for genetic structure when testing for associations. We develop intuition for why and when spurious correlations may occur analytically and conduct population-genetic and phylogenetic simulations of quantitative traits. The structural similarity of problems in statistical genetics and phylogenetics enables us to take methodological advances from one field and apply them in the other. We demonstrate by showing how a standard GWAS technique-including both the genetic relatedness matrix (GRM) as well as its leading eigenvectors, corresponding to the principal components of the genotype matrix, in a regression model-can mitigate spurious correlations in phylogenetic analyses. As a case study, we re-examine an analysis testing for coevolution of expression levels between genes across a fungal phylogeny and show that including eigenvectors of the covariance matrix as covariates decreases the false positive rate while simultaneously increasing the true positive rate. More generally, this work provides a foundation for more integrative approaches for understanding the genetic architecture of phenotypes and how evolutionary processes shape it.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.