The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Genetic Similarities Within and Between Human Populations
Open accessAbstract
The proportion of human genetic variation due to differences between populations is modest, and individuals from different populations can be genetically more similar than individuals from the same population. Yet sufficient genetic data can permit accurate classification of individuals into populations. Both findings can be obtained from the same data set, using the same number of polymorphic loci. This article explains why. Our analysis focuses on the frequency, ω, with which a pair of random individuals from two different populations is genetically more similar than a pair of individuals randomly selected from any single population. We compare ω to the error rates of several classification methods, using data sets that vary in number of loci, average allele frequency, populations sampled, and polymorphism ascertainment strategy. We demonstrate that classification methods achieve higher discriminatory power than ω because of their use of aggregate properties of populations. The number of loci analyzed is the most critical variable: with 100 polymorphisms, accurate classification is possible, but ω remains sizable, even when using populations as distinct as sub-Saharan Africans and Europeans. Phenotypes controlled by a dozen or fewer loci can therefore be expected to show substantial overlap between human populations. This provides empirical justification for caution when using population labels in biomedical settings, with broad implications for personalized medicine, pharmacogenetics, and the meaning of race.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Citations
Cites
Evidence for Gradients of Human Genetic Diversity Within and Among Continents
Serre, D., & Pääbo, S. (2004) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.2529604 · Cited by 436
Cited by
Vitamin C: The known and the unknown and Goldilocks
Padayatty, S., & Levine, M. (2016) · Oral Diseases · doi:10.1111/odi.12446 · Cited by 753
Health Equity Tourism: Ravaging the Justice Landscape
Lett, E., Adekunle, D., McMurray, P., Asabor, E. N., Irie, W., Simon, M. A., Hardeman, R., & McLemore, M. R. (2022) · Journal of Medical Systems · doi:10.1007/s10916-022-01803-5 · Cited by 264
The Role of Transposable Elements in Health and Diseases of the Central Nervous System
Reilly, M. T., Faulkner, G. J., Dubnau, J., Ponomarev, I., & Gage, F. H. (2013) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.3369-13.2013 · Cited by 175
Abandon “Race.” Focus on Racism
Braveman, P., & Parker Dominguez, T. (2021) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.689462 · Cited by 171
Population identification using genetic data
Lawson, D. J., & Falush, D. (2012) · Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics · doi:10.1146/annurev-genom-082410-101510 · Cited by 89
Metadata
- Authors
- Witherspoon, D. J., Wooding, S., Rogers, A. R., Marchani, E. E., Watkins, W. S., Batzer, M. A., & Jorde, L. B.
- Venue
- Genetics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2007-05-01
- Volume
- 176
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 351-359
- ISSN
- 0016-6731 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-2631
- OpenAlex
- W2134782025
- Cited by
- 269
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Genetic Similarities Within and Between Human Populations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1534/genetics.106.067355
- The paper
- Witherspoon, D. J., Wooding, S., Rogers, A. R., Marchani, E. E., Watkins, W. S., Batzer, M. A., & Jorde, L. B. (2007). Genetic Similarities Within and Between Human Populations. Genetics. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.106.067355
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.