ArticleGenes2018
MHC-Dependent Mate Selection within 872 Spousal Pairs of European Ancestry from the Health and Retirement Study.
Article in Genes, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Major histocompatibility complex-associated odour preferences and human mate choice: near and far horizons.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020Pooled it
- Facial attractiveness is only weakly linked to genome-wide heterozygosity.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Food Security and Nutrition as the Neglected Missing Links in Cultural Evolution: The Role of the Sociotype.Rambam Maimonides medical journal · 2022Review
- Genomic evidence for MHC disassortative mating in humans.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Disassortative mating refers to the phenomenon in which individuals with dissimilar genotypes and/or phenotypes mate with one another more frequently than would be expected by chance. Although the existence of disassortative mating is well established in plant and animal species, the only documented example of negative assortment in humans involves dissimilarity at the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) locus. Previous studies investigating mating patterns at the MHC have been hampered by limited sample size and contradictory findings. Inspired by the sparse and conflicting evidence, we investigated the role that the MHC region played in human mate selection using genome-wide association data from 872 European American spouses from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS). First, we treated the MHC region as a whole, and investigated genomic similarity between spouses using three levels of genomic variation: single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), classical human leukocyte antigen (HLA) alleles (both four-digit and two-digit classifications), and amino acid polymorphisms. The extent of MHC dissimilarity between spouses was assessed using a permutation approach. Second, we investigated fine scale mating patterns by testing for deviations from random mating at individual SNPs, HLA genes, and amino acids in HLA molecules. Third, we assessed how extreme the spousal relatedness at the MHC region was compared to the rest of the genome, to distinguish the MHC-specific effects from genome-wide effects. We show that neither the MHC region, nor any single SNPs, classic HLA alleles, or amino acid polymorphisms within the MHC region, were significantly dissimilar between spouses relative to non-spouse pairs. However, dissimilarity in the MHC region was extreme relative to the rest of genome for both spousal and non-spouse pairs. Despite the long-standing controversy, our analyses did not support a significant role of MHC dissimilarity in human mate choice.
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.