Cited by 329Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyForensic and Genetic ResearchEvolution and Genetic Dynamics

Evidence of widespread selection on standing variation in Europe at height-associated SNPs

Open access
Turchin, Michael C, Chiang, Charleston WK, Palmer, Cameron D, Sankararaman, Sriram, Reich, David, Genetic Investigation of ANthropometric Traits (GIANT) Consortium, Hirschhorn, Joel N·2012·Nature Genetics

Abstract

Strong signatures of positive selection at newly arising genetic variants are well documented in humans(1-8), but this form of selection may not be widespread in recent human evolution(9). Because many human traits are highly polygenic and partly determined by common, ancient genetic variation, an alternative model for rapid genetic adaptation has been proposed: weak selection acting on many pre-existing (standing) genetic variants, or polygenic adaptation(10-12). By studying height, a classic polygenic trait, we demonstrate the first human signature of widespread selection on standing variation. We show that frequencies of alleles associated with increased height, both at known loci and genome wide, are systematically elevated in Northern Europeans compared with Southern Europeans (P < 4.3 × 10(-4)). This pattern mirrors intra-European height differences and is not confounded by ancestry or other ascertainment biases. The systematic frequency differences are consistent with the presence of widespread weak selection (selection coefficients ∼10(-3)-10(-5) per allele) rather than genetic drift alone (P < 10(-15)).

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/ng.2368

Cites

33 of 33 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?

  • Both height and skin pigmentation exhibit substantial variation within and across human populations, and are thought to be under positive selection in various populations.

    “Both height and skin pigmentation exhibit substantial variation within and across human populations, and are thought to be under positive selection in various populations [19–22].”
  • Height seems to be under positive selection within European and African populations separately.

    “While height seems to be under positive selection within European and African populations separately [19,34], it does not appear to be driven by divergent selection pressures across the populations considered here.”

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
Turchin, M. C., Chiang, C. W., Palmer, C. D., Sankararaman, S., Reich, D., Genetic Investigation of ANthropometric Traits (GIANT) Consortium, & Hirschhorn, J. N.
Affiliations
  • Boston Children's Hospital (US)
  • Broad Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Hirschhorn, Joel N
Venue
Nature Genetics
Published
2012-08-19
Volume
44
Issue
9
Pages
1015-1019
ISSN
  • 1061-4036 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-1718
OpenAlex
W2106100115
Cited by
329
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 2
FWCI
14.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • Site cant be reached (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (n01hc25195-41-0-1)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (N01‐HC25195, N02- HL-64278, N01-HC-025195)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM100233)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01DK075787)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Forensic and Genetic Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
Keywords
polygenic adaptation, standing genetic variation, height, positive selection, allele frequency differences, selection coefficients, genetic drift, human evolution
MeSH terms
Adult, Body Height, Europe, Female, Gene Frequency, Genetics, Population, Humans, Male, Selection, Genetic, Genetic Variation, Cohort Studies, Likelihood Functions, Multifactorial Inheritance, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, White People, 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