Officially out, our work trying to delineate and understand selection happening during admixture in Neolithic Europe. We find that admixed Neolithic populations inherit more hunter-gatherer ancestry at the MHC region than expected by chance.
https://t.co/V4UnQStHvF
These analyses and some of these points are from a recent review I co-authored on ancestry diversity in large-scale genomic data, in which we talk about GWAS, PRS, rare variants, and African genomics: https://t.co/RZxyKuhMZY (12/12)
With ASHG starting, thought it was a good time to write this thread. It’s often quoted in discussions of ancestry diversity in GWAS that X% of participants of all GWAS are European. But what do these fractions mean? Are they measuring what we’re really interested in? (1/12)
My feeling is that the typical metrics of GWAS ancestry diversity (e.g., as what’s reported in GWAS Diversity Monitor) are getting harder to interpret and less meaningful with time as biobank & consortium level datasets with rich phenotyping become more dominant. (11/12)
Our preprint looking at adaptive admixture through the Neolithic transition in Europe is out! Great collaboration with @mathiesoniain and Dan Ju. Looking forward to presenting this at Heidelberg next week! #EEShuman
https://t.co/Fr2L3hnag3