The social genome: Current findings and implications for the study of human genetics

PLoS Genetics

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2017, Pages

  Domingue, Benjamin W ^a   Belsky, Daniel W ^b,c  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b DUKE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; C57BL 6 MOUSE; DBA 2 MOUSE; EPISTASIS; GENE EXPRESSION; GENE LOCUS; GENE STRUCTURE; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION; GENETIC TRAIT; GENOME; GENOTYPE; GENOTYPING TECHNIQUE; HERITABILITY; HUMAN; HUMAN GENETICS; NONHUMAN; PHENOTYPE; PHENOTYPIC VARIATION; PLEIOTROPY; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT; SOCIAL EPISTASIS; SOCIAL GENETIC EFFECT; SOCIAL GENOME; SOCIAL GENOTYPING; SOCIAL INTERACTION; GENETICS; HUMAN GENOME; HUMAN GENOME PROJECT; MEDICAL GENETICS;

GENETICS; GENETICS, MEDICAL; GENOME; GENOME, HUMAN; HUMAN GENETICS; HUMAN GENOME PROJECT; HUMANS;

EID: 85016587416     PISSN: 15537390     EISSN: 15537404     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1006615     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Polderman TJ, Benyamin B, De Leeuw CA, Sullivan PF, Van Bochoven A, Visscher PM, et al. Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies. Nat Genet. 2015;47: 702–709. doi: 10.1038/ng.3285 25985137
2. Khoury MJ, Wacholder S, Invited Commentary: From Genome-Wide Association Studies to Gene-Environment-Wide Interaction Studies-025EFChallenges and Opportunities. Am J Epidemiol. 2009;169: 227–230. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwn351 19022826
3. Boardman JD, Daw J, Freese J, Defining the environment in gene–environment research: lessons from social epidemiology. Am J Public Health. 2013;103: S64–S72. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2013.301355 23927514
4. Baud A, Mulligan M, Casale F, Ingels J, Bohl C, Callebert J, et al. Genetic variation in the social environment contributes to health and disease. PLoS Genet13(1): e1006498. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1006498 28121987
5. Wolf JB, Brodie ED, IIICheverud JM, Moore AJ, Wade MJ, Evolutionary consequences of indirect genetic effects. Trends Ecol Evol. 1998;13: 64–69. 21238202
6. Moore AJ, Brodie ED, IIIWolf JB, Interacting phenotypes and the evolutionary process: I. Direct and indirect genetic effects of social interactions. Evolution. 1997;51: 1352–1362.
7. Champagne FA, Meaney MJ, Stress during gestation alters postpartum maternal care and the development of the offspring in a rodent model. Biol Psychiatry. 2006;59: 1227–1235. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.10.016 16457784
8. Petfield D, Chenoweth SF, Rundle HD, Blows MW, Genetic variance in female condition predicts indirect genetic variance in male sexual display traits. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2005;102: 6045–6050. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0409378102 15840726
9. Bergsma R, Kanis E, Knol EF, Bijma P, The contribution of social effects to heritable variation in finishing traits of domestic pigs (Sus scrofa). Genetics. 2008;178: 1559–1570. doi: 10.1534/genetics.107.084236 18245326
10. Christakis NA, Fowler JH, The Spread of Obesity in a Large Social Network over 32 Years. N Engl J Med. 2007;357: 370–379. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa066082 17652652
11. Cohen-Cole E, Fletcher JM, Is obesity contagious? Social networks vs. environmental factors in the obesity epidemic. J Health Econ. 2008;27: 1382–1387. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2008.04.005 18571258
12. VanderWeele TJ, Sensitivity Analysis for Contagion Effects in Social Networks. Sociol Methods Res. 2011;40: 240–255. doi: 10.1177/0049124111404821 25580037
13. Lawlor DA, Harbord RM, Sterne JA, Timpson N, Davey Smith G, Mendelian randomization: using genes as instruments for making causal inferences in epidemiology. Stat Med. 2008;27: 1133–1163. doi: 10.1002/sim.3034 17886233
14. Bulik-Sullivan B, Finucane HK, Anttila V, Gusev A, Day FR, Loh P-R, et al. An atlas of genetic correlations across human diseases and traits. Nat Genet. 2015;47: 1236–1241. doi: 10.1038/ng.3406 26414676
15. Barban N, Jansen R, de Vlaming R, Vaez A, Mandemakers JJ, Tropf FC, et al. Genome-wide analysis identifies 12 loci influencing human reproductive behavior. Nat Genet. 2016;48: 1462–1472. doi: 10.1038/ng.3698 27798627
16. McPherson M, Smith-Lovin L, Cook JM, Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annu Rev Sociol. 2001; 415–444.
17. Centola D, The Spread of Behavior in an Online Social Network Experiment. Science. 2010;329: 1194–1197. doi: 10.1126/science.1185231 20813952
18. Conley D, Laidley T, Belsky D, Fletcher J, Boardman J, Domingue B, Assortative mating and differential fertility by phenotype and genotype across the 20th century. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2016; 24: 6647–6652.
19. Domingue BW, Fletcher J, Conley D, Boardman JD, Genetic and educational assortative mating among US adults. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2014;111: 7996–8000. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1321426111 24843128
20. House JS, Landis KR, Umberson D, Social relationships and health. Science. 1988;241: 540–545. 3399889
21. Belsky DW, Moffitt TE, Corcoran DL, Domingue B, Harrington H, Hogan S, et al. The Genetics of Success: How Single-Nucleotide Polymorphisms Associated With Educational Attainment Relate to Life-Course Development. Psychol Sci. 2016;27: 957–972. doi: 10.1177/0956797616643070 27251486
22. Snyder-Mackler N, Sanz J, Kohn JN, Brinkworth JF, Morrow S, Shaver AO, et al. Social status alters immune regulation and response to infection in macaques. Science. 2016;354: 1041–1045. doi: 10.1126/science.aah3580 27885030
23. Granovetter MS, The strength of weak ties. Am J Sociol. 1973; 1360–1380.