Cited by 364Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals

Variation and genetic control of protein abundance in humans

Open access
Wu, Linfeng, Candille, Sophie I., Choi, Yoonha, Xie, Dan, Jiang, Lihua, Li-Pook-Than, Jennifer, Tang, Hua, Snyder, Michael·2013·Nature

Abstract

Gene expression differs among individuals and populations and is thought to be a major determinant of phenotypic variation. Although variation and genetic loci responsible for RNA expression levels have been analysed extensively in human populations, our knowledge is limited regarding the differences in human protein abundance and the genetic basis for this difference. Variation in messenger RNA expression is not a perfect surrogate for protein expression because the latter is influenced by an array of post-transcriptional regulatory mechanisms, and, empirically, the correlation between protein and mRNA levels is generally modest. Here we used isobaric tag-based quantitative mass spectrometry to determine relative protein levels of 5,953 genes in lymphoblastoid cell lines from 95 diverse individuals genotyped in the HapMap Project. We found that protein levels are heritable molecular phenotypes that exhibit considerable variation between individuals, populations and sexes. Levels of specific sets of proteins involved in the same biological process covary among individuals, indicating that these processes are tightly regulated at the protein level. We identified cis-pQTLs (protein quantitative trait loci), including variants not detected by previous transcriptome studies. This study demonstrates the feasibility of high-throughput human proteome quantification that, when integrated with DNA variation and transcriptome information, adds a new dimension to the characterization of gene expression regulation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nature12223

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • There are few reports of QTLs associated with protein levels (pQTLs) in humans.

    “Yet, in contrast to comparative work, there are few reports of QTLs associated with protein levels (pQTLs) in humans (15-17).”

    From Impact of regulatory variation from RNA to protein (2015) · cites this paper as [15]

  • The observation that many eQTLs are not associated with protein differences is consistent with protein levels diverging less than transcript levels across species.

    “Our observation that many SNPs identified as eQTLs are not associated with differences in protein levels is consistent with the notion that, across species, protein levels diverge less than transcript levels (12-17).”

    From Impact of regulatory variation from RNA to protein (2015) · cites this paper as [15]

  • An analysis of HapMap individuals reported that almost two-thirds of 185 observed cis-acting pQTLs were not found in complementary RNA analysis.

    “An analysis of individuals genotyped in the HapMap project reported that almost two-thirds of 185 observed cis-acting pQTLs were not found in a complementary analysis of the RNA89.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wu, L., Candille, S. I., Choi, Y., Xie, D., Jiang, L., Li-Pook-Than, J., Tang, H., & Snyder, M.
Affiliations
Stanford Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
  • Tang, Hua
  • Snyder, Michael
Venue
Nature
Published
2013-05-15
Volume
499
Issue
7456
Pages
79-82
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2073109785
Cited by
364
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 46 · 2014: 44 · 2013: 14
FWCI
29.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (U01HL107393)
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (P50HG002357)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM073059)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Keywords
protein abundance, protein quantitative trait loci, cis-pQTL, interindividual variability, heritability, post-transcriptional regulation, mRNA-protein correlation, gene expression regulation, lymphoblastoid cell lines, sex differences, population variation, HapMap
MeSH terms
Cell Line, Ethnicity, Female, Gene Expression Regulation, Genotype, Humans, Male, Phenotype, RNA, Messenger, Mass Spectrometry, Protein Biosynthesis, Genetic Variation, Proteome, Gene Expression Profiling, Quantitative Trait Loci, Proteomics, Transcriptome, HapMap Project

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