ArticlePloS one2016
Genetic and Environmental Contributions to Facial Morphological Variation: A 3D Population-Based Twin Study.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 43 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
43 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Advancement in Human Face Prediction Using DNA.Genes · 2023Pooled it
- Influence of heritability on occlusal traits: a systematic review of studies in twins.Progress in orthodontics · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Article
- Transverse Growth of Facial Soft Tissues: A Longitudinal Three-Dimensional Facial Growth Study.Orthodontics & craniofacial research · 2026Article
- Vertical Growth of Facial Soft Tissues: A Longitudinal Three-Dimensional Facial Growth Study.Orthodontics & craniofacial research · 2026Article
- Dentofacial Malocclusion and Salivary Biomarkers in Asthmatic Patients: A Scoping Review.International dental journal · 2026Article
- Genetic architecture of craniofacial morphogenesis: roles ofFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Predicting Zygosity based on physical similarity of twin pairs with the aid of machine learning methods.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Comparative study of fetal facial shape between Japanese and North American populations using micro-CT.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Positional programs in early murine facial development and their role in human facial shape variability.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Combined genome-wide association study of facial traits in Europeans increases explained variance and improves prediction.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Interplay of polymorphisms in sex hormone receptors and facial sexual differentiation in shaping prosocial behavior.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Optimized phenotyping of complex morphological traits: enhancing discovery of common and rare genetic variants.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Comparison of Different 3D Surface Registration-Based Methods to Assess Facial Asymmetry.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Genetic and environmental contributions to the development of soft tissue facial profile: a twin study.European journal of orthodontics · 2024Article
- Chewing Side Preference, Facial Asymmetry and Related Factors in the Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1986.Acta odontologica Scandinavica · 2024Article
- Computer-aided craniofacial superimposition validation study: the identification of the leaders and participants of the Polish-Lithuanian January Uprising (1863-1864).International journal of legal medicine · 2024Article
- Facial morphology differences in monozygotic twins: a retrospective stereophotogrammetric study.The Angle orthodontist · 2023Article
- The Facial Characteristics of Individuals with Posterior Crossbite: A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFacial phenotype is influenced by genes and environment; however, little is known about their relative contributions to normal facial morphology. The aim of this study was to assess the relative genetic and environmental contributions to facial morphological variation using a three-dimensional (3D) population-based approach and the classical twin study design. MATERIALS AND
methods3D facial images of 1380 female twins from the TwinsUK Registry database were used. All faces were landmarked, by manually placing 37 landmark points, and Procrustes registered. Three groups of traits were extracted and analysed: 19 principal components (uPC) and 23 principal components (sPC), derived from the unscaled and scaled landmark configurations respectively, and 1275 linear distances measured between 51 landmarks (37 manually identified and 14 automatically calculated). The intraclass correlation coefficients, rMZ and rDZ, broad-sense heritability (h2), common (c2) and unique (e2) environment contributions were calculated for all traits for the monozygotic (MZ) and dizygotic (DZ) twins.
resultsHeritability of 13 uPC and 17 sPC reached statistical significance, with h2 ranging from 38.8% to 78.5% in the former and 30.5% to 84.8% in the latter group. Also, 1222 distances showed evidence of genetic control. Common environment contributed to one PC in both groups and 53 linear distances (4.3%). Unique environment contributed to 17 uPC and 20 sPC and 1245 distances.
conclusionsGenetic factors can explain more than 70% of the phenotypic facial variation in facial size, nose (width, prominence and height), lips prominence and inter-ocular distance. A few traits have shown potential dominant genetic influence: the prominence and height of the nose, the lower lip prominence in relation to the chin and upper lip philtrum length. Environmental contribution to facial variation seems to be the greatest for the mandibular ramus height and horizontal facial asymmetry.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.