Cited by 8,279Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

GCTA: A Tool for Genome-wide Complex Trait Analysis

Open access
Yang, Jian, Lee, S. Hong, Goddard, Michael E., Visscher, Peter M.·2011·The American Journal of Human Genetics

Abstract

For most human complex diseases and traits, SNPs identified by genome-wide association studies (GWAS) explain only a small fraction of the heritability. Here we report a user-friendly software tool called genome-wide complex trait analysis (GCTA), which was developed based on a method we recently developed to address the "missing heritability" problem. GCTA estimates the variance explained by all the SNPs on a chromosome or on the whole genome for a complex trait rather than testing the association of any particular SNP to the trait. We introduce GCTA's five main functions: data management, estimation of the genetic relationships from SNPs, mixed linear model analysis of variance explained by the SNPs, estimation of the linkage disequilibrium structure, and GWAS simulation. We focus on the function of estimating the variance explained by all the SNPs on the X chromosome and testing the hypotheses of dosage compensation. The GCTA software is a versatile tool to estimate and partition complex trait variation with large GWAS data sets.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajhg.2010.11.011

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 36 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Li, 2006, Mach 1.0: Rapid Haplotype Reconstruction and Missing Genotype Inference, Am. J. Hum. Genet., S79, 2290

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–260 of 260

Metadata

Authors
Yang, J., Lee, S. H., Goddard, M. E., & Visscher, P. M.
Affiliations
  • QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute (AU)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
Yang, Jian
Venue
The American Journal of Human Genetics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-01
Volume
88
Issue
1
Pages
76-82
ISSN
0002-9297 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2033151532
Cited by
8,279
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 646 · 2025: 847 · 2024: 973 · 2023: 808 · 2022: 856 · 2021: 847 · 2020: 735 · 2019: 560 · 2018: 460 · 2017: 393 · 2016: 367 · 2015: 291 · 2014: 231 · 2013: 146 · 2012: 97
FWCI
46.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The American Journal of Human Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EPubDev Repository (submittedVersion)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
  • RUNE (Research UNE) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Australian Research Council
  • National Health and Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Keywords
GCTA, missing heritability, linear mixed models, X chromosome, dosage compensation, complex traits
MeSH terms
Computer Simulation, Dosage Compensation, Genetic, Female, Humans, Genetic Linkage, Male, Models, Genetic, Software, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Quantitative Trait Loci, Chromosomes, Human, X, Genome-Wide Association Study

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review