Leading Edge
Select
Sorting Out Complex Thoughts and Messy
Emotions
Cognition. Intelligence. Emotion. Sexuality. These are not
merely complicated traits, invoking awed respect. These
are aspects of animal life and human nature that are daunting
in their biological complexity and in their existential impor-
tance. Curious biologists have been tackling animal behavior
for centuries, but some topics and behaviors still remain opa-
que to biological understanding. While the demystification of
human nature might give some unease, more of us are simply
skeptical of any attempt to unravel the genetic underpinnings
of such things.
For years now, genome-wide association studies (GWAS)
have been mining ever-growing genetic datasets for clues
to the genetic bases of complex traits and diseases that
include behaviors and disabilities in cognition, intelligence,
sexuality, social interaction, and emotion. Along with a few
breakthroughs, there have been significant disappointments
and legitimate questions about the limits of potential success
(Visscher et al., 2012).
Some geneticists don’t seem to have gotten the memo.
Discussing the biology of human intelligence is a good way
to start a scholarly brawl, and yet this complex trait is strongly
heritable. Previous GWAS have found hints and candidates
for causative genes, but the results are thought to be statis-
tically underpowered. However, in May an international
collaborative group published a large meta-analysis of data
combined from these previous GWAS (and with new data),
and reported 30 new and very promising candidate genes
influencing human intelligence (Sniekers et al., 2017). By
increasing the cohort (nearly 80,000 people) and using
some new tools (such as MAGMA), the work substantially
expanded the list of genetic players. One new candidate is
FOXO3, a transcription factor involved in insulin/IGF
signaling.
What of love? Shakespeare claimed that the course of true
love never did run smooth, but geneticists recently claimed
Image from iStock/Photo2008.
that assortative mating occurs in humans, meaning that
humans tend to select mates that resemble themselves to
some extent (Robinson et al., 2017). This operates phenotyp-
ically, separate from confounding influences (such as social-
ization), and has implications for human population genetics
and evolution. Another recent report found 12 genes associ-
ated with human reproductive behavior, specifically age at
first birth and number of children (Barban et al., 2016).
Romantic.
Not even parenting practices are sacred. Hopi Hoekstra
and her group study the evolution and genetics of behavior
in closely related species of mice—the mice exhibit signifi-
cant behavioral differences but can interbreed. This facili-
tates quantitative genetics and whole-genome analysis of
behavioral traits. In a paper in April, the group reports on
the genetics of parenting (Bendesky et al., 2017). Their tour
de force showed heritability of a suite of parental behaviors
(such as nest-making and baby-licking) and then dissected
the genetic infrastructure. Even though the behaviors seem
very similar in males and females, the underlying genetics
can differ significantly. One behavior, nest-building, stands
out, both because it seems genetically independent of other
parenting tasks and because it has evolved through changes
in the expression of vasopressin.
Quantitative genetics is bringing powerful tools to old
questions, including some deemed sacred or hopelessly
complex. More drama is certain to come. Be sure to get a
good seat.
REFERENCES
Barban, N., Jansen, R., de Vlaming, R., Vaez, A., Mandemakers, J.J.,
Tropf, F.C., Shen, X., Wilson, J.F., Chasman, D.I., Nolte, I.M., et al; BIOS Con-
sortium; LifeLines Cohort Study (2016). Nat. Genet. 48, 1462–1472.
Bendesky, A., Kwon, Y.M., Lassance, J.M., Lewarch, C.L., Yao, S.,
Peterson, B.K., He, M.X., Dulac, C., and Hoekstra, H.E. (2017). Nature 544,
434–439.
Robinson, M., Kleinman, A., Graff, M., Vinkhuyzen, A., Couper, D., Miller, M.,
Peyrot, W., Abdellaoui, A., Zietsch, B., Nolte, I., et al. (2017). Nat. Hum.
Behav. 1 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41562-016-0016.
Sniekers, S., Stringer, S., Watanabe, K., Jansen, P.R., Coleman, J.R.I.,
Krapohl, E., Taskesen, E., Hammerschlag, A.R., Okbay, A., Zabaneh, D.,
et al. (2017). Nat. Genet. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ng.3869.
Visscher, P.M., Brown, M.A., McCarthy, M.I., and Yang, J. (2012). Am. J. Hum.
Genet. 90, 7–24.
Stephen Matheson
Editor, Cell Reports
Cell 169, June 15, 2017 ª 2017 Published by Elsevier Inc. 1157