Literature DB >> 32886191

Assessment of the potential role of natural selection in type 2 diabetes and related traits across human continental ancestry groups: comparison of phenotypic with genotypic divergence.

Robert L Hanson1, Cristopher V Van Hout2, Wen-Chi Hsueh3, Alan R Shuldiner2, Sayuko Kobes3, Madhumita Sinha3, Leslie J Baier3, William C Knowler3.   

Abstract

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Prevalence of type 2 diabetes differs among human ancestry groups, and many hypotheses invoke differential natural selection to account for these differences. We sought to assess the potential role of differential natural selection across major continental ancestry groups for diabetes and related traits, by comparison of genetic and phenotypic differences.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional comparison among 734 individuals from an urban sample (none of whom was more closely related to another than third-degree relatives), including 83 African Americans, 523 American Indians and 128 European Americans. Participants were not recruited based on diabetes status or other traits. BMI was calculated, and diabetes was diagnosed by a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test. In those with normal glucose tolerance (n = 434), fasting insulin and 30 min post-load insulin, adjusted for 30 min glucose, were taken as measures of insulin resistance and secretion, respectively. Whole exome sequencing was performed, resulting in 97,388 common (minor allele frequency ≥ 5%) variants; the coancestry coefficient (FST) was calculated across all markers as a measure of genetic divergence among ancestry groups. The phenotypic divergence index (PST) was also calculated from the phenotypic differences and heritability (which was estimated from genetic relatedness calculated empirically across all markers in 761 American Indian participants prior to the exclusion of close relatives). Under evolutionary neutrality, the expectation is PST = FST, while for traits under differential selection PST is expected to be significantly greater than FST. A bootstrap procedure was used to test the hypothesis PST = FST.
RESULTS: With adjustment for age and sex, prevalence of type 2 diabetes was 34.0% in American Indians, 12.4% in African Americans and 10.4% in European Americans (p = 2.9 × 10-10 for difference among groups). Mean BMI was 36.3, 33.4 and 33.0 kg/m2, respectively (p = 1.9 × 10-7). Mean fasting insulin was 63.8, 48.4 and 45.2 pmol/l (p = 9.2 × 10-5), while mean 30 min insulin was 559.8, 553.5 and 358.8 pmol/l, respectively (p = 5.7 × 10-8). FST across all markers was 0.130, while PST for liability to diabetes, adjusted for age and sex, was 0.149 (p = 0.35 for difference with FST). PST was 0.094 for BMI (p = 0.54), 0.095 for fasting insulin (p = 0.54) and 0.216 (p = 0.18) for 30 min insulin. For type 2 diabetes and BMI, the maximum divergence between populations was observed between American Indians and European Americans (PST-MAX = 0.22, p = 0.37, and PST-MAX = 0.14, p = 0.61), which suggests that a relatively modest 22% or 14% of the genetic variance, respectively, can potentially be explained by differential selection (assuming the absence of neutral drift). CONCLUSIONS/
INTERPRETATION: These analyses suggest that while type 2 diabetes and related traits differ significantly among continental ancestry groups, the differences are consistent with neutral expectations based on heritability and genetic distances. While these analyses do not exclude a modest role for natural selection, they do not support the hypothesis that differential natural selection is necessary to explain the phenotypic differences among these ancestry groups. Graphical abstract.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Natural selection; Obesity; Type 2 diabetes mellitus

Year:  2020        PMID: 32886191      PMCID: PMC7642101          DOI: 10.1007/s00125-020-05272-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diabetologia        ISSN: 0012-186X            Impact factor:   10.122


  51 in total

1.  Enhanced pedigree error detection.

Authors:  Lei Sun; Kenneth Wilder; Mary Sara McPeek
Journal:  Hum Hered       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 0.444

Review 2.  Estimating F-statistics.

Authors:  B S Weir; W G Hill
Journal:  Annu Rev Genet       Date:  2002-06-11       Impact factor: 16.830

3.  Testing for spatially divergent selection: comparing QST to FST.

Authors:  Michael C Whitlock; Frederic Guillaume
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2009-08-17       Impact factor: 4.562

4.  Archaeology of NIDDM. Excavation of the "thrifty" genotype.

Authors:  M Wendorf; I D Goldfine
Journal:  Diabetes       Date:  1991-02       Impact factor: 9.461

5.  Multipoint quantitative-trait linkage analysis in general pedigrees.

Authors:  L Almasy; J Blangero
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 11.025

6.  The use of likelihood-based confidence intervals in genetic models.

Authors:  M C Neale; M B Miller
Journal:  Behav Genet       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 2.805

7.  Enhanced AFLP genome scans detect local adaptation in high-altitude populations of a small rodent (Microtus arvalis).

Authors:  Martin C Fischer; Matthieu Foll; Laurent Excoffier; Gerald Heckel
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2011-02-24       Impact factor: 6.185

8.  The carnivore connection: dietary carbohydrate in the evolution of NIDDM.

Authors:  J C Miller; S Colagiuri
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 10.122

9.  Estimating and interpreting FST: the impact of rare variants.

Authors:  Gaurav Bhatia; Nick Patterson; Sriram Sankararaman; Alkes L Price
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2013-07-16       Impact factor: 9.043

10.  Diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus.

Authors: 
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 19.112

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Epidemiology of Type 2 Diabetes in Indigenous Communities in the United States.

Authors:  Lauren E Wedekind; Cassie M Mitchell; Coley C Andersen; William C Knowler; Robert L Hanson
Journal:  Curr Diab Rep       Date:  2021-11-22       Impact factor: 4.810

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.