Great meeting with Dr Morishita and Professor Takeda at the University of Tokyo (other campus though - testing my Tokyo metro skills) on Medaka fish genome and annotation. They have some great HiC data during Medaka development in the works - look out for the publication
Worth stressing again that there are classes of questions we can't answer in human - we can make statistical models, and fit those models, but we can (rarely) challenge or explore the underlying model in human - eg, how many GxE loci are there and do they overlap with GxG?
There is a surprisingly large amount of "this is the simplest model we can think of to describe the data so let's use it" in human genetics, and some real handwaving moments - how much "variance" is due to structured environment and how much due to individual chance events?
We can't get at some of these things easily (some studies try, but it's really hard) and most human genetics sweep all of these terms up together, along with measurement error (confusingly often called "environment" - not a good moniker) and this gets mainly ignored.
This is both because one can't control most variables in human (in particular the environment) and also because the numbers really work against you for some analyses - for example, the product of allele frequencies, in particular >2 make most GxG explorations in human a nightmare
We *need* non human models - both to do the "final mile" set of experiments to really nail down causality (eg, introducing specific changes via CRISPR) but also just simply to understand what is going on - both biologically, physiologically and statistically.
Many models are applicable - Marmoset, Mouse, Rat, Chicken, Xenopus, Zebrafish and ... my favoured Medaka fish ("Japanese rice paddy fish"). Why Medaka fish? The key feature is you can inbreed Medaka fish reliably from the wild (~50% of inbreeding attempts succeed)
We (Felix Loosli, Jochen Wittbrodt, Kiyoshi Naruse and myself) have made the first ever inbred panel from the wild in a vertebrate (old hat for arabidopsis and Drosophila - new for vertebrates!). This panel has 110 lines and alleles and allele frequencies that come from the wild
If you are human geneticist, it is as if Framingham, or part of UK BioBank, or part of Finland, was in fact a set of every lasting identical twins which you can repeat studies on again and again. Doing 10 embryos from a isogenic line is pretty routine in Medaka.
If you come from animal studies, this is like a recombinant inbred line, except the recombination is population scale recombination. This has positives (crazy good mapping properties!) and negatives (too much haplotype diversity, low allele frequencies).
University Tokyo's old campus is lovely - mature Ginko trees with the leaves being swept up; old buildings in the gothic style. Now waiting in a cafe in Tokyo station for the right train to get me to Okazaki where NIBB and @Naruse_kiyoshi is.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
So @JeremyFarrar asked for an "explainer thread" on Noble Prizes in Chemistry around AlphaFold and Protein design, so here goes.
First off, this is an old problem. It starts with observations in the 1950s/1960s, leading to a Noble Prize in 1972 to Anfinsen, Moore and Stein where in particular Anfinsen convincingly shows that the particular sequence of amino acids in a protein determines its 3D structure
Just to visualise this; think of amino acid chain as different sorts of beads on a string. The beads come in 20 types - some type like to stick to other types; some types like to be hidden away from water; some are small and some are large. A protein is somewhere around 50 beads
Great to see this paper out by @D_Westergaard and colleagues - including myself - leveraging the just jaw-droppingly good combination of the Danish pedigree data (across the entire country!) and their highly detailed EHR. nature.com/articles/s4146…
This is pedigree based genetics - the correlation of phenotypes (in this case diagnoses of diseases) - as was done in the 1910s - formalised by RA Fischer and S. Wright from ideas at the turn of the 20th Cent.
This concept of the correlation of phenotype to pedigree predates the identification of DNA as molecular mechanism for inheritance - this is old school genetics updated in the modern age.
One of the more depressing things re-engaging on social media is the undercurrent of pseudo-scientific racism which continues to pop up with exciting data rich plots, often lots of maths and just lots of class A bullshit justifying tired anti-woke (but just ol' fashioned racist)
I'm not going to amplify the crappy threads/blogs/messages forwarded to me, but I do want to arm my followers with the most cogent arguments against this if this does come up in conversation around you.
First off, humans are a super-young species - we exploded out of Africa very quickly and although lots of the details we still don't know (and the science changes quickly) it's pretty clear we adapted to the changing environment main by behaviour
A reminder ( it’s an evergreen topic) - humans are a genetically undiverse species - we exploded out Africa in a heartbeat of evolutionary time and we predominantly adapted to the multitude of environments by our behaviour, passing that knowledge down culturally in groups
Although there are genetic adaptations to some environments- eg lack of sunlight (fair skin), regular milk consumption (lactase persistence) or reduced sweat for humid environments (less sweat pores and thicker hair) these have two features
Firstly these adaptions are sparse in the context of the genome - its small regions which do this
A short, personal thread on what is odd about other cultures when interacting with Brits, and then also what I think is odd about Brits when interacting with other cultures - highly, highly personal, but from >30 years working internationally.
German+Dutch do not have to preface a challenge with "I think you might have missed something..." or some other British-style softening up. It is entirely fine - indeed polite/shows respect - just come out "you are wrong because X,Y" - this directness is surprising for a Brit.
Northern (Protestant/river/Prussian) Germans are very different from Southern (Catholic, Mountain+Forest) Germans. Don't confuse them. External stereotypes of Germans (in particular in Britain) is a weird mixture of both and you have to untangle this.
The publication of the whole genomes from the US @AllofUsResearch cohort is great to see, but the choice of how to represent an overview of the genetic relationships has (rightly) drawn controversy, in particular how the concepts of ethnicity and race are mapped to it.
This is not in bad faith - the AllofUs cohort should be applauded in its diversity push and much of the but it is an illustration of the messiness of genetics and the inability to represent our complex relationships in any 2D space. Longer thread below>>
A reminder that genetics (the variation in DNA sequence passed down from your parents, +their parents etc) and race or ethnicity (a box people tick on surveys or on census) are quite different concepts, strongly linked only by visible features which are genetic, eg, skin colour