ArticleHuman genomics2024
Evolutionary and functional analyses of LRP5 in archaic and extant modern humans.
Article in Human genomics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Accelerated Evolution of Context-Dependent Gene Expression in Primate Immune Cells.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe human lineage has undergone a postcranial skeleton gracilization (i.e. lower bone mass and strength relative to body size) compared to other primates and archaic populations such as the Neanderthals. This gracilization has been traditionally explained by differences in the mechanical load that our ancestors exercised. However, there is growing evidence that gracilization could also be genetically influenced.
resultsWe have analyzed the LRP5 gene, which is known to be associated with high bone mineral density conditions, from an evolutionary and functional point of view. Taking advantage of the published genomes of archaic Homo populations, our results suggest that this gene has a complex evolutionary history both between archaic and living humans and within living human populations. In particular, we identified the presence of different selective pressures in archaics and extant modern humans, as well as evidence of positive selection in the African and South East Asian populations from the 1000 Genomes Project. Furthermore, we observed a very limited evidence of archaic introgression in this gene (only at three haplotypes of East Asian ancestry out of the 1000 Genomes), compatible with a general erasing of the fingerprint of archaic introgression due to functional differences in archaics compared to extant modern humans. In agreement with this hypothesis, we observed private mutations in the archaic genomes that we experimentally validated as putatively increasing bone mineral density. In particular, four of five archaic missense mutations affecting the first β-propeller of LRP5 displayed enhanced Wnt pathway activation, of which two also displayed reduced negative regulation.
conclusionsIn summary, these data suggest a genetic component contributing to the understanding of skeletal differences between extant modern humans and archaic Homo populations.
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.