PreprintCited by 0Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock

Sequence-based variant-effect predictions reveal trait-specific regulatory-layer profiles of complex-trait heritability

Open access
Choi, Byung Hyug, Jeong, Jaeseung·2026·medRxiv

Abstract

Partitioned-heritability studies have shown which tissues carry the heritability of complex traits, but whether the regulatory layer whose annotations are most informative for heritability within a tissue differs between traits has not been tested, because measured annotations for different layers come from different sets of biosamples. Sequence-to-function models predict the allelic effect of every variant on several regulatory layers with a single model, so that layers can be compared on the same variants within the same tissues. We grouped AlphaGenome Atlas predictions into 12 lineages and six regulatory layers and partitioned the heritability of 11 complex traits with stratified LD score regression. Traits localized largely to the expected lineages, and within these lineages the most informative predicted layer differed between traits (P = 3.6 x 10^-8). Predicted chromatin-accessibility (DNase) effects were the most informative for height and bone mineral density, whereas predicted transcription-initiation (CAGE) effects were the most informative for Alzheimer's disease, most brain traits and cholesterol levels. The difference persisted across sensitivity analyses, and the predicted contrast held for three related traits whose layers had been predicted in advance (P = 2 x 10^-7). Predicted CAGE effects also remained informative after conditioning on fine-mapped eQTLs and measured regulatory annotations. These results identify differences across traits in the heritability information captured by predicted regulatory layers and offer testable hypotheses for investigating the regulatory basis of complex traits.

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 · 10.64898/2026.10.16.26365786

Cites

0 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

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

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Cited by

Still being checked.

Authors
Choi, B. H., & Jeong, J.
Affiliations
  • Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), Daejeon, 34141, Republic of Korea
  • Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KR)
Corresponding author
Jeong, Jaeseung
Venue
medRxiv
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2026-10-19
OpenAlex
W7222958247
Cited by
0
References
0
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
The Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI), funded by the Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea (RS-2025-25455095)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Keywords
chromatin accessibility, DNase, transcription initiation, CAGE, Alzheimer's disease, height, bone mineral density, cholesterol levels

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