The story suggests this is a small effect, but to me 20% (esp. if total, not just genetic contribution) is pretty big for one gene.
I thought I had read somewhere years back that almost all genes contributed to height, and this even required full sequence data capturing potentially unique mutations (vs. SNPs) making it very complex to model. But I guess that could be required in determining absolute height, whereas simply the male/female difference could be much simpler. Maybe a domain expert here can share better context.
marojejian•5h ago
paper: https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2503039122
The story suggests this is a small effect, but to me 20% (esp. if total, not just genetic contribution) is pretty big for one gene.
I thought I had read somewhere years back that almost all genes contributed to height, and this even required full sequence data capturing potentially unique mutations (vs. SNPs) making it very complex to model. But I guess that could be required in determining absolute height, whereas simply the male/female difference could be much simpler. Maybe a domain expert here can share better context.