Within-family heritability estimates for behavioural and disease phenotypes from 500,000 sibling pairs of diverse ancestries
Open accessAbstract
Quantification of the direct effect of genetic variation on human behavioural traits is important for understanding between-individual variation in socioeconomic and health outcomes but estimates of their heritability can be biased by between-family indirect genetic effects. By contrast, using within-family variation in DNA sharing is robust to most confounding factors including shared environmental effects and population stratification. Yet, accurate estimates for most traits are not available using this design, and none for non-European ancestry populations. Here we analyse approximately 500,000 sibling pairs with diverse genetic ancestries and obtain within-family heritability estimates for 14 phenotypes, including two well-studied model traits: height (0.70 ± 0.03) and BMI (0.49 ± 0.03). For behaviour, we find significant within-family heritability for smoking initiation (0.34 ± 0.05), alcohol consumption (0.18 ± 0.04), number of children (0.27 ± 0.11) and personality ('talk versus listen', 0.48 ± 0.13). In addition, we estimated large heritability for type 2 diabetes (0.43 ± 0.06) and asthma (0.34 ± 0.06), whose risk factors include behavioural traits. Overall, we show concordant estimates across ancestry groups and highlight a significant contribution of shared environmental effects for behaviour and type 2 diabetes risk, which may have inflated between-family estimates. Altogether, our results provide within-family evidence that genetic variation is associated with variation in complex traits, common disease and exposures. Our heritability estimates are concordant across genetic ancestries, lower than those from twin-based studies, yet larger than has been accounted for by genome-wide association studies so far.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 43
- Authors
- Yengo, L., Liang, Y., 23andMe Research Team, Wang, X., Granka, J. M., Evans, D. M., Sidorenko, J., & Visscher, P. M.
- Affiliations
- 23andMe (United States) (US)
- The University of Queensland (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Visscher, Peter M.
- Venue
- Nature Human Behaviour
- Published
- 2026-10-26
- ISSN
- 2397-3374 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W7223684880
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 43
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Nature Human Behaviour (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Snow Medical
- National Health and Medical Research Council (2017942)
- 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 › Genetics and Physical Performance
- Keywords
- sibling pairs, behavioral characteristics, disease phenotypes, shared environmental effects, indirect genetic effects, genetic ancestry, type 2 diabetes, asthma, smoking initiation, alcohol consumption, number of children, personality, height, body mass index, complex traits
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