ArticlePLoS genetics2020
Modeling epistasis in mice and yeast using the proportion of two or more distinct genetic backgrounds: Evidence for "polygenic epistasis".
Article in PLoS genetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- LocusPackRat: an R package to support prioritizing candidate genes from large GWAS intervals with standardized evidence aggregation.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Article
- LocusPackRat: a Semi-Automated Framework for Prioritizing Candidate Genes from Large GWAS Intervals.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Concordance between male- and female-specific GWAS results helps define underlying genetic architecture of complex traits.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Article
- Factorizing polygenic epistasis improves prediction and uncovers biological pathways in complex traits.American journal of human genetics · 2023Article
- A model and test for coordinated polygenic epistasis in complex traits.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021Article
- Admixed Populations Improve Power for Variant Discovery and Portability in Genome-Wide Association Studies.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe majority of quantitative genetic models used to map complex traits assume that alleles have similar effects across all individuals. Significant evidence suggests, however, that epistatic interactions modulate the impact of many alleles. Nevertheless, identifying epistatic interactions remains computationally and statistically challenging. In this work, we address some of these challenges by developing a statistical test for polygenic epistasis that determines whether the effect of an allele is altered by the global genetic ancestry proportion from distinct progenitors.
resultsWe applied our method to data from mice and yeast. For the mice, we observed 49 significant genotype-by-ancestry interaction associations across 14 phenotypes as well as over 1,400 Bonferroni-corrected genotype-by-ancestry interaction associations for mouse gene expression data. For the yeast, we observed 92 significant genotype-by-ancestry interactions across 38 phenotypes. Given this evidence of epistasis, we test for and observe evidence of rapid selection pressure on ancestry specific polymorphisms within one of the cohorts, consistent with epistatic selection.
conclusionsUnlike our prior work in human populations, we observe widespread evidence of ancestry-modified SNP effects, perhaps reflecting the greater divergence present in crosses using mice and yeast.
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.