High-throughput mouse phenomics for characterizing mammalian gene function

Nature Reviews Genetics

Volumn 19, Issue 6, 2018, Pages 357-370

  Brown, Steve D M ^a   Holmes, Chris C ^b   Mallon, Ann Marie ^a   Meehan, Terrence F ^c   Smedley, Damian ^d   Wells, Sara ^a  

^a MRC MAMMALIAN GENETICS UNIT   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^c WELLCOME TRUST SANGER INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

^d QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGE; ANIMAL GENETICS; CLADISTICS; EXPERIMENTAL MOUSE; GENE FUNCTION; GENETIC SCREENING; GENETIC VARIATION; GENOME ANALYSIS; GENOTYPE ENVIRONMENT INTERACTION; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; HYPOTHESIS; INBRED STRAIN; MACHINE LEARNING; MEDICAL GENETICS; MOUSE MUTANT; MUTAGENESIS; NONHUMAN; OUTBRED STRAIN; PHENOTYPIC VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCIBILITY; REVIEW; ANIMAL; GENETIC DATABASE; GENOME; GENOMICS; HUMAN; MOUSE; PROCEDURES;

ANIMALS; DATABASES, GENETIC; GENETIC VARIATION; GENOME; GENOMICS; HUMANS; MICE;

EID: 85045036942     PISSN: 14710056     EISSN: 14710064     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/s41576-018-0005-2     Document Type: Review

References (135)

1. Brown, S. D., Wurst, W., Kuhn, R., Hancock, J. M. The functional annotation of mammalian genomes: The challenge of phenotyping. Annu. Rev. Genet. 43, 305-333 (2009).
2. Doyle, A., McGarry, M. P., Lee, N. A., Lee, J. J. The construction of transgenic and gene knockout/knockin mouse models of human disease. Transgenic Res. 21, 327-349 (2012).
3. Bouabe, H., Okkenhaug, K. Gene targeting in mice: A review. Methods Mol. Biol. 1064, 315-336 (2013).
4. Wang, H. et al. One-step generation of mice carrying mutations in multiple genes by CRISPR/Cas-mediated genome engineering. Cell 153, 910-918 (2013).
5. Fernandez, A., Josa, S., Montoliu, L. A history of genome editing in mammals. Mamm. Genome 28, 237-246 (2017).
6. Birling, M. C., Herault, Y., Pavlovic, G. Modeling human disease in rodents by CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing. Mamm. Genome 28, 291-301 (2017).
7. Hrabe de Angelis, M. H. et al. Genome-wide, large-scale production of mutant mice by ENU mutagenesis. Nat. Genet. 25, 444-447 (2000).
8. Nolan, P. M. et al. A systematic, genome-wide, phenotype-driven mutagenesis programme for gene function studies in the mouse. Nat. Genet. 25, 440-443 (2000).
9. Takeda, J., Keng, V. W., Horie, K. Germline mutagenesis mediated by Sleeping Beauty transposon system in mice. Genome Biol. 8 (Suppl. 1), S14 (2007).
10. White, J. K. et al. Genome-wide generation and systematic phenotyping of knockout mice reveals new roles for many genes. Cell 154, 452-464 (2013).
11. de Angelis, M. H. et al. Analysis of mammalian gene function through broad-based phenotypic screens across a consortium of mouse clinics. Nat. Genet. 47, 969-978 (2015).
12. Brown, S. D., Moore, M. W. The International Mouse Phenotyping Consortium: Past and future perspectives on mouse phenotyping. Mamm. Genome 23, 632-640 (2012).
13. Visscher, P. M., Yang, J. A plethora of pleiotropy across complex traits. Nat. Genet. 48, 707-708 (2016).
14. Dickinson, M. E. et al. High-throughput discovery of novel developmental phenotypes. Nature 537, 508-514 (2016).
15. Chong, J. X. et al. The genetic basis of mendelian phenotypes: Discoveries, challenges, and opportunities. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 97, 199-215 (2015).
16. Boyle, E. A., Li, Y. I., Pritchard, J. K. An expanded view of complex traits: From polygenic to omnigenic. Cell 169, 1177-1186 (2017).
17. Bush, W. S., Oetjens, M. T., Crawford, D. C. Unravelling the human genome-phenome relationship using phenome-wide association studies. Nat. Rev. Genet. 17, 129-145 (2016).
18. Schlager, G., Dickie, M. M. Natural mutation rates in the house mouse. Estimates for five specific loci and dominant mutations. Mutat. Res. 11, 89-96 (1971).
19. Davisson, M. T., Bergstrom, D. E., Reinholdt, L. G., Donahue, L. R. Discovery genetics-the history and future of spontaneous mutation research. Curr. Protoc. Mouse Biol. 2, 103-118 (2012).
20. Rogers, D. C. et al. Behavioral and functional analysis of mouse phenotype: SHIRPA, a proposed protocol for comprehensive phenotype assessment. Mamm. Genome 8, 711-713 (1997).
21. Rogers, D. C. et al. SHIRPA, a protocol for behavioral assessment: Validation for longitudinal study of neurological dysfunction in mice. Neurosci. Lett. 306, 89-92 (2001).
22. Russell, L. B., Russell, W. L., Popp, R. A., Vaughan, C., Jacobson, K. B. Radiation-induced mutations at mouse hemoglobin loci. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 73, 2843-2846 (1976).
23. Russell, W. L. et al. Specific-locus test shows ethylnitrosourea to be the most potent mutagen in the mouse. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 76, 5818-5819 (1979).
24. Nolan, P. M. et al. Implementation of a large-scale ENU mutagenesis program: Towards increasing the mouse mutant resource. Mamm. Genome 11, 500-506 (2000).
25. Arnold, C. N. et al. ENU-induced phenovariance in mice: Inferences from 587 mutations. BMC Res. Notes 5, 577 (2012).
26. Oliver, P. L., Davies, K. E. New insights into behaviour using mouse ENU mutagenesis. Hum. Mol. Genet. 21, R72-R81 (2012).
27. Boles, M. K. et al. A mouse chromosome 4 balancer ENU-mutagenesis screen isolates eleven lethal lines. BMC Genet. 10, 12 (2009).
28. Liu, X. et al. ENU mutagenesis screen to establish motor phenotypes in wild-type mice and modifiers of a pre-existing motor phenotype in tau mutant mice. J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 2011, 130947 (2011).
29. Tucci, V. et al. Reaching and grasping phenotypes in the mouse (Mus musculus): A characterization of inbred strains and mutant lines. Neuroscience 147, 573-582 (2007).
30. Zimprich, A. et al. Analysis of locomotor behavior in the German Mouse Clinic. J. Neurosci. Methods https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2017.05.005 (2017).
31. Wilson, L. et al. Random mutagenesis of proximal mouse chromosome 5 uncovers predominantly embryonic lethal mutations. Genome Res. 15, 1095-1105 (2005).
32. Flint, J. et al. A simple genetic basis for a complex psychological trait in laboratory mice. Science 269, 1432-1435 (1995).
33. Wada, Y. et al. ENU mutagenesis screening for dominant behavioral mutations based on normal control data obtained in home-cage activity, open-field, and passive avoidance tests. Exp. Anim. 59, 495-510 (2010).
34. Vitaterna, M. H. et al. Mutagenesis and mapping of a mouse gene, Clock, essential for circadian behavior. Science 264, 719-725 (1994).
35. Mandillo, S. et al. Reliability, robustness, and reproducibility in mouse behavioral phenotyping: A cross-laboratory study. Physiol. Genom. 34, 243-255 (2008).
36. Isaacs, A. M. et al. A mutation in Af4 is predicted to cause cerebellar ataxia and cataracts in the robotic mouse. J. Neurosci. 23, 1631-1637 (2003).
37. Clapcote, S. J. et al. Behavioral phenotypes of Disc1 missense mutations in mice. Neuron 54, 387-402 (2007).
38. Potter, P. K. et al. Novel gene function revealed by mouse mutagenesis screens for models of age-related disease. Nat. Commun. 7, 12444 (2016).
39. Hardisty-Hughes, R. E., Parker, A., Brown, S. D. A hearing and vestibular phenotyping pipeline to identify mouse mutants with hearing impairment. Nat. Protoc. 5, 177-190 (2010).
40. Esapa, C. T. et al. N-Ethyl-N-nitrosourea (ENU) induced mutations within the klotho gene lead to ectopic calcification and reduced lifespan in mouse models. PLOS One 10, e0122650 (2015).
41. Carpinelli, M. R. et al. Suppressor screen in Mpl-/-mice: C-Myb mutation causes supraphysiological production of platelets in the absence of thrombopoietin signaling. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101, 6553-6558 (2004).
42. Aigner, B. et al. Diabetes models by screen for hyperglycemia in phenotype-driven ENU mouse mutagenesis projects. Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab. 294, E232-E240 (2008).
43. Hough, T. A. et al. Novel phenotypes identified by plasma biochemical screening in the mouse. Mamm. Genome 13, 595-602 (2002).
44. Aigner, B. et al. Generation of N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea-induced mouse mutants with deviations in hematological parameters. Mamm. Genome 22, 495-505 (2011).
45. Hoebe, K., Beutler, B. Forward genetic analysis of TLR-signaling pathways: An evaluation. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 60, 824-829 (2008).
46. Miosge, L. A., Blasioli, J., Blery, M., Goodnow, C. C. Analysis of an ethylnitrosourea-generated mouse mutation defines a cell intrinsic role of nuclear factor kappaB2 in regulating circulating B cell numbers. J. Exp. Med. 196, 1113-1119 (2002).
47. Nelms, K. A., Goodnow, C. C. Genome-wide ENU mutagenesis to reveal immune regulators. Immunity 15, 409-418 (2001).
48. Adissu, H. A. et al. Histopathology reveals correlative and unique phenotypes in a high-throughput mouse phenotyping screen. Dis. Model. Mech. 7, 515-524 (2014).
49. Wong, M. D., Dorr, A. E., Walls, J. R., Lerch, J. P., Henkelman, R. M. A novel 3D mouse embryo atlas based on micro-CT. Development 139, 3248-3256 (2012).
50. Wong, M. D., Maezawa, Y., Lerch, J. P., Henkelman, R. M. Automated pipeline for anatomical phenotyping of mouse embryos using micro-CT. Development 141, 2533-2541 (2014).
51. Wong, M. D. et al. 4D atlas of the mouse embryo for precise morphological staging. Development 142, 3583-3591 (2015).
52. Weninger, W. J. et al. Phenotyping structural abnormalities in mouse embryos using high-resolution episcopic microscopy. Dis. Model. Mech. 7, 1143-1152 (2014).
53. Gailus-Durner, V. et al. Introducing the German Mouse Clinic: Open access platform for standardized phenotyping. Nat. Methods 2, 403-404 (2005).
54. Brown, S. D., Chambon, P., de Angelis, M. H., Eumorphia, C. EMPReSS: Standardized phenotype screens for functional annotation of the mouse genome. Nat. Genet. 37, 1155 (2005).
55. Tucci, V. et al. Gene-environment interactions differentially affect mouse strain behavioral parameters. Mamm. Genome 17, 1113-1120 (2006).
56. Bradley, A. et al. The mammalian gene function resource: The International Knockout Mouse Consortium. Mamm. Genome 23, 580-586 (2012).
57. Skarnes, W. C. et al. A conditional knockout resource for the genome-wide study of mouse gene function. Nature 474, 337-342 (2011).
58. Blair, D. R. et al. A nondegenerate code of deleterious variants in Mendelian loci contributes to complex disease risk. Cell 155, 70-80 (2013).
59. Sungur, A. O., Schwarting, R. K., Wohr, M. Early communication deficits in the Shank1 knockout mouse model for autism spectrum disorder: Developmental aspects and effects of social context. Autism Res. 9, 696-709 (2016).
60. Sungur, A. O., Schwarting, R. K. W., Wohr, M. Behavioral phenotypes and neurobiological mechanisms in the Shank1 mouse model for autism spectrum disorder: A translational perspective. Behav. Brain Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2017.09.038 (2017).
61. Schmeisser, M. J. et al. Autistic-like behaviours and hyperactivity in mice lacking ProSAP1/Shank2. Nature 486, 256-260 (2012).
62. Katayama, Y. et al. CHD8 haploinsufficiency results in autistic-like phenotypes in mice. Nature 537, 675-679 (2016).
63. Platt, R. J. et al. Chd8 mutation leads to autistic-like behaviors and impaired striatal circuits. Cell Rep. 19, 335-350 (2017).
64. Meehan, T. F. et al. Disease model discovery from 3,328 gene knockouts by The International Mouse Phenotyping Consortium. Nat. Genet. 49, 1231-1238 (2017).
65. Raj, A., Rifkin, S. A., Andersen, E., van Oudenaarden, A. Variability in gene expression underlies incomplete penetrance. Nature 463, 913-918 (2010).
66. Karp, N. A. et al. Prevalence of sexual dimorphism in mammalian phenotypic traits. Nat. Commun. 8, 15475 (2017).
67. Bowl, M. R. et al. A large scale hearing loss screen reveals an extensive unexplored genetic landscape for auditory dysfunction. Nat. Commun. 8, 886 (2017).
68. Rozman, J. et al. Identification of genetic elements in metabolism by high-throughput mouse phenotyping. Nat. Commun. 9, 288 (2018).
69. Peirce, J. L., Lu, L., Gu, J., Silver, L. M., Williams, R. W. A new set of BXD recombinant inbred lines from advanced intercross populations in mice. BMC Genet. 5, 7 (2004).
70. Churchill, G. A. et al. The Collaborative Cross, a community resource for the genetic analysis of complex traits. Nat. Genet. 36, 1133-1137 (2004).
71. Paigen, K., Eppig, J. T. A mouse phenome project. Mamm. Genome 11, 715-717 (2000).
72. Bennett, B. J. et al. A high-resolution association mapping panel for the dissection of complex traits in mice. Genome Res. 20, 281-290 (2010).
73. Patterson, M. et al. Frequency of mononuclear diploid cardiomyocytes underlies natural variation in heart regeneration. Nat. Genet. 49, 1346-1353 (2017).
74. Shusterman, A. et al. Genotype is an important determinant factor of host susceptibility to periodontitis in the collaborative cross and inbred mouse populations. BMC Genet. 14, 68 (2013).
75. Mao, J. H. et al. Identification of genetic factors that modify motor performance and body weight using collaborative cross mice. Sci. Rep. 5, 16247 (2015).
76. Solberg, L. C. et al. A protocol for high-throughput phenotyping, suitable for quantitative trait analysis in mice. Mamm. Genome 17, 129-146 (2006).
77. Valdar, W. et al. Genome-wide genetic association of complex traits in heterogeneous stock mice. Nat. Genet. 38, 879-887 (2006).
78. Svenson, K. L. et al. High-resolution genetic mapping using the mouse diversity outbred population. Genetics 190, 437-447 (2012).
79. Churchill, G. A., Gatti, D. M., Munger, S. C., Svenson, K. L. The diversity outbred mouse population. Mamm. Genome 23, 713-718 (2012).
80. Pallares, L. F. et al. Mapping of craniofacial traits in outbred mice identifies major developmental genes involved in shape determination. PLOS Genet. 11, e1005607 (2015).
81. Nicod, J. et al. Genome-wide association of multiple complex traits in outbred mice by ultra-low-coverage sequencing. Nat. Genet. 48, 912-918 (2016).
82. Doetschman, T. Influence of genetic background on genetically engineered mouse phenotypes. Methods Mol. Biol. 530, 423-433 (2009).
83. Broman, K. W. The genomes of recombinant inbred lines. Genetics 169, 1133-1146 (2005).
84. Sittig, L. J. et al. Genetic background limits generalizability of genotype-phenotype relationships. Neuron 91, 1253-1259 (2016).
85. Moon, C. et al. Vertically transmitted faecal IgA levels determine extra-chromosomal phenotypic variation. Nature 521, 90-93 (2015).
86. Nguyen, T. L., Vieira-Silva, S., Liston, A., Raes, J. How informative is the mouse for human gut microbiota research? Dis. Model. Mech. 8, 1-16 (2015).
87. Overton, J. M. Phenotyping small animals as models for the human metabolic syndrome: Thermoneutrality matters. Int. J. Obes. 34, (Suppl. 2) S53-S58 (2010).
88. Robinson, L., Riedel, G. Comparison of automated home-cage monitoring systems: Emphasis on feeding behaviour, activity and spatial learning following pharmacological interventions. J. Neurosci. Methods 234, 13-25 (2014).
89. Spruijt, B. M., Peters, S. M., de Heer, R. C., Pothuizen, H. H., van der Harst, J. E. Reproducibility and relevance of future behavioral sciences should benefit from a cross fertilization of past recommendations and today's technology: "Back to the future". J. Neurosci. Methods 234, 2-12 (2014).
90. Bains, R. S. et al. Assessing mouse behaviour throughout the light/dark cycle using automated in-cage analysis tools. J. Neurosci. Methods. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2017.04.014 (2017).
91. Hong, W. et al. Automated measurement of mouse social behaviors using depth sensing, video tracking, and machine learning. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, E5351-E5360 (2015).
92. Zarringhalam, K. et al. An open system for automatic home-cage behavioral analysis and its application to male and female mouse models of Huntington's disease. Behav. Brain Res. 229, 216-225 (2012).
93. Steele, A. D., Jackson, W. S., King, O. D., Lindquist, S. The power of automated high-resolution behavior analysis revealed by its application to mouse models of Huntington's and prion diseases. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 1983-1988 (2007).
94. Bains, R. S. et al. Analysis of individual mouse activity in group housed animals of different inbred strains using a novel automated home cage analysis system. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 10, 106 (2016).
95. Valletta, J. J., Torney, C., Kings, M., Thornton, A., Madden, J. Applications of machine learning in animal behaviour studies. Animal Behav. 124, 203-220 (2017).
96. Atamni, H. J., Mott, R., Soller, M., Iraqi, F. A. High-fat-diet induced development of increased fasting glucose levels and impaired response to intraperitoneal glucose challenge in the collaborative cross mouse genetic reference population. BMC Genet. 17, 10 (2016).
97. Myint, A. et al. Large-scale phenotyping of noise-induced hearing loss in 100 strains of mice. Hear Res. 332, 113-120 (2016).
98. Ferris, M. T. et al. Modeling host genetic regulation of influenza pathogenesis in the collaborative cross. PLOS Pathog. 9, e1003196 (2013).
99. Horsch, M. et al. Cox4i2, Ifit2, and Prdm11 mutant mice: Effective selection of genes predisposing to an altered airway inflammatory response from a large compendium of mutant mouse lines. PLOS One 10, e0134503 (2015).
100. Sundberg, J. P. et al. The mouse as a model for understanding chronic diseases of aging: The histopathologic basis of aging in inbred mice. Pathobiol Aging Age Relat. Dis. 1, https://doi.org/10.3402/pba.v1i0.7179 (2011).
101. Sundberg, J. P. et al. Approaches to investigating complex genetic traits in a large-scale inbred mouse aging study. Vet. Pathol. 53, 456-467 (2016).
102. Karp, N. A. et al. Applying the ARRIVE guidelines to an in vivo database. PLOS Biol. 13, e1002151 (2015).
103. Karp, N. A. et al. Impact of temporal variation on design and analysis of mouse knockout phenotyping studies. PLOS One 9, e111239 (2014).
104. Van Valen, D. A. et al. Deep learning automates the quantitative analysis of individual cells in live-cell imaging experiments. PLOS Comput. Biol. 12, e1005177 (2016).
105. Wilkinson, M. D. et al. The FAIR guiding principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci. Data 3, 160018 (2016).
106. Roadmap Epigenomics Consortium et al. Integrative analysis of 111 reference human epigenomes. Nature 518, 317-330 (2015).
107. Kawaji, H., Kasukawa, T., Forrest, A., Carninci, P., Hayashizaki, Y. The FANTOM5 collection, a data series underpinning mammalian transcriptome atlases in diverse cell types. Sci. Data 4, 170113 (2017).
108. Sudlow, C. et al. UK biobank: An open access resource for identifying the causes of a wide range of complex diseases of middle and old age. PLOS Med. 12, e1001779 (2015).
109. Smith, C. L., Eppig, J. T. The mammalian phenotype ontology as a unifying standard for experimental and high-throughput phenotyping data. Mamm. Genome 23, 653-668 (2012).
110. Hayamizu, T. F. et al. EMAP/EMAPA ontology of mouse developmental anatomy: 2013 update. J. Biomed. Semant. 4, 15 (2013).
111. Gkoutos, G. V., Schofield, P. N., Hoehndorf, R. The anatomy of phenotype ontologies: Principles, properties and applications. Brief Bioinform. https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbx035 (2017).
112. Consortium, G. T. et al. Genetic effects on gene expression across human tissues. Nature 550, 204-213 (2017).
113. Szklarczyk, D. et al. The STRING database in 2017: Quality-controlled protein-protein association networks, made broadly accessible. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, D362-D368 (2017).
114. Rath, A. et al. Representation of rare diseases in health information systems: The Orphanet approach to serve a wide range of end users. Hum. Mutat. 33, 803-808 (2012).
115. Zhu, X., Stephens, M. A large-scale genome-wide enrichment analysis identifies new trait-associated genes, pathways and tissues across 31 human phenotypes. Bio Rxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/160770 (2017).
116. Rukat, T., Holmes, C. C., Titsias, M. K., Yau, C. Bayesian boolean matrix factorisation. Proc. Machine Learn. Res. 70, 2969-2978 (2017).
117. Wiltschko, A. B. et al. Mapping sub-second structure in mouse behavior. Neuron 88, 1121-1135 (2015).
118. Cortes, A. et al. Bayesian analysis of genetic association across tree-structured routine healthcare data in the UK Biobank. Nat. Genet. 49, 1311-1318 (2017).
119. Ng, S. B. et al. Exome sequencing identifies the cause of a mendelian disorder. Nat. Genet. 42, 30-35 (2010).
120. Rabbani, B., Mahdieh, N., Hosomichi, K., Nakaoka, H., Inoue, I. Next-generation sequencing: Impact of exome sequencing in characterizing Mendelian disorders. J. Hum. Genet. 57, 621-632 (2012).
121. Ramoni, R. B. et al. The undiagnosed diseases network: Accelerating discovery about health and disease. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 100, 185-192 (2017).
122. Collins, F. S., Varmus, H. A new initiative on precision medicine. N. Engl. J. Med. 372, 793-795 (2015).
123. Yang, Y. et al. Clinical whole-exome sequencing for the diagnosis of mendelian disorders. N. Engl. J. Med. 369, 1502-1511 (2013).
124. Yang, Y. et al. Molecular findings among patients referred for clinical whole-exome sequencing. JAMA 312, 1870-1879 (2014).
125. Lee, H. et al. Clinical exome sequencing for genetic identification of rare Mendelian disorders. JAMA 312, 1880-1887 (2014).
126. Koscielny, G. et al. The International Mouse Phenotyping Consortium Web Portal, a unified point of access for knockout mice and related phenotyping data. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, D802-D809 (2014).
127. Wang, J. et al. MARRVEL: Integration of human and model organism genetic resources to facilitate functional annotation of the human genome. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 100, 843-853 (2017).
128. Mungall, C. J. et al. The monarch initiative: An integrative data and analytic platform connecting phenotypes to genotypes across species. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, D712-D722 (2017).
129. Smedley, D., Robinson, P. N. Phenotype-driven strategies for exome prioritization of human Mendelian disease genes. Genome Med. 7, 81 (2015).
130. Robinson, P. N. et al. Improved exome prioritization of disease genes through cross-species phenotype comparison. Genome Res. 24, 340-348 (2014).
131. Smedley, D. et al. A whole-genome analysis framework for effective identification of pathogenic regulatory variants in Mendelian disease. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 99, 595-606 (2016).
132. Singleton, M. V. et al. Phevor combines multiple biomedical ontologies for accurate identification of disease-causing alleles in single individuals and small nuclear families. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 94, 599-610 (2014).
133. Gall, T. et al. Defining disease, diagnosis, and translational medicine within a homeostatic perturbation paradigm: The national institutes of health undiagnosed diseases program experience. Front. Med. 4, 62 (2017).
134. Kohler, S. et al. The human phenotype ontology in 2017. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, D865-D876 (2017).
135. Mungall, C. J. et al. Integrating phenotype ontologies across multiple species. Genome Biol. 11, R2 (2010).