Human Genetics

, Volume 118, Issue 3–4, pp 366–371 | Cite as

Geography is a better determinant of human genetic differentiation than ethnicity

  • Andrea Manica
  • Franck Prugnolle
  • François Balloux
Original Investigation

Abstract

Individuals differ genetically in their susceptibility to particular diseases and their response to drugs. However, personalized treatments are difficult to develop, because disease susceptibility and drug response generally have poorly characterized genetic architecture. It is thus tempting to use the ethnicity of patients to capture some of the variation in allele frequencies at the genes underlying a clinical trait. The success of such a strategy depends on whether human populations can be accurately classified into discrete genetic ethnic groups. Despite the heated discussions and controversies surrounding this issue, there has been essentially no attempt so far to quantify the relative power of ethnic groups and geography at predicting the proportion of shared alleles between human populations. Here, we present the first such quantification using a dataset of 51 populations typed at 377 autosomal microsatellite markers, and show that pair-wise geographic distances across landmasses constitute a far better predictor than ethnicity. Allele-sharing between human populations worldwide decays smoothly with increasing physical distance. We discuss the relevance of these patterns for the expected distribution of variants of medical interest. The distribution patterns of gene coding for simple traits are expected to be highly heterogeneous, as most such genes experienced strong natural selection. However, variants involved in complex traits are expected to behave essentially neutrally, and we expect them to fit closely our predictions based on microsatellites. We conclude that the use of ethnicity alone will often be inadequate as a basis for medical treatment.

References

  1. Bamshad M, Wooding S (2003) Signatures of natural selection in the human genome. Nat Rev Genet 4:99–111PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bowcock A, Ruiz-Linares A, Tonfohrde J, Minch E, Kidd J, Cavalli-Sforza L (1994) High resolution of human evolutionary trees with polymorphic microsatellites. Nature 386:455–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Burchard E, Ziv E, Coyle N, Gomez S, Tang H, Karter A, Mountain J, Perez-Stable E, Sheppard D, Risch N (2003) The importance of race and ethnic background in biomedical research and clinical practice. N Engl J Med 348:1170–1175PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cavalli-Sforza LL, Feldman W (2003) The application of molecular genetic approaches to the study of human evolution. Nat Genet 33(Suppl):266–275PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ellegren H (2000) Microsatellite mutations in the germline: implications for evolutionary inference. Trends Genet 16:551–558PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Goldstein D, Chikhi L (2002) Human migrations and population structure: what we know and why it matters. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet 3:129–152PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Goldstein D, Hirschhorn J (2004) In genetic control of disease, does “race” matter? Nat Genet 36:1243–1244PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Goldstein D, Tate S, Sisodiya S (2003) Pharmacogenetics goes genomic. Nat Rev Genet 4:937–947PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hirschhorn J, Lohmueller K, Byrne E, Hirschhorn K (2002) A comprehensive review of genetic association studies. Genet Med 4:45–61PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ioannidis J, Ntzani E, Trikalinos T (2004) “Racial” differences in genetic effects for complex diseases. Nat Genet 36: 1312–1318PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jorde L, Wooding S (2004) Genetic variation, classification and “race”. Nat Genet 36:S28–S33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kaessmann H, Zollner S, Gustafsson A, Wiebe V, Laan M, Lundeberg J, Uhlen M, Paabo S (2002) Extensive linkage disequilibrium in small human populations in Eurasia. Am J Hum Genet 70:673–685PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Keita S, Kittles R, Royal C, Bonney G, Furbert-Harris P, Dunston G, Rotimi C (2004) Conceptualizing human variation. Nat Genet 36:S17–S20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lazarou J, Pomeranz B, Corey P (1998) Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients—a meta-analysis of prospective studies. JAMA 279:1200–1205PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Legendre P, Legendre L (1998) Numerical ecology, 2nd English edn. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  16. Pritchard J, Cox N (2002) The allelic architecture of human disease genes: common disease—common variant ... or not? Hum Mol Genet 11:2417–2423PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155:945–959PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Prugnolle F, Manica A, Balloux F (2005a) Geography predicts neutral genetic diversity of human populations. Curr Biol 15:R159–R160PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Prugnolle F, Manica A, Charpentier M, Guégan J, Guernier V, Balloux F (2005b) Worldwide HLA diversity: human colonisation history and pathogen-driven selection. Curr Biol 15:1022–1027PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Reich D, Cargill M, Bolk S, Ireland J, Sabeti P, Richter D, Lavery T, Kouyoumjian R, Farhadian S, Ward R, Lander E (2001) Linkage disequilibrium in the human genome. Nature 411:199–204PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Risch N (2000) Searching for genetic determinants in the new millenium. Nature 405:847–856PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Risch N, Burchard E, Ziv E, Tang H (2002) Categorization of humans in biomedical research: genes, race and disease. Genome Biol 3(7):comment 2007Google Scholar
  23. Rosenberg NA, Pritchard JK, Weber JL, Cann HM, Kidd KK, Zhivotovsky LA, Feldman MW (2002) Genetic structure of human populations. Science 298:2381–2385PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rotimi C (2004) Are medical and nonmedical uses of large-scale genomic markers conflating genetics and “race”? Nat Genet 36:S43–S47PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Serre D, Pääbo S (2004) Evidence for gradients of human genetic diversity within and among continents. Genome Res 14:1679–1685PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Stephens J, Reich D, Goldstein D, Shin H, Smith M, Carrington M, Winkler C, Huttley G, Allikmets R, Schriml L, Gerrard B, Malasky M, Ramos M, Morlot S, Tzetis M, Oddoux C, di Giovine F, Nasioulas G, Chandler D, Aseev M, Hanson M, Kalaydjieva L, Glavac D, Gasparini P, Kanavakis E, Claustres M, Kambouris M, Ostrer H, Duff G, Baranov V, Sibul H, Metspalu A, Goldman D, Martin N, Duffy D, Schmidtke J, Estivill X, O’Brien S, Dean M (1998) Dating the origin of the CCR5-Delta 32 AIDS-resistance allele by the coalescence of haplotypes. Am J Hum Genet 62:1507–1515PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tate S, Goldstein D (2004) Will tomorrow’s medicines work for everyone? Nat Genet 36:S34–S42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. R Core Development Team (2004) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for statistical computing, Vienna, ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org
  29. Tishkoff S, Kidd K (2004) Implications of biogeography of human populations for “race” and medicine. Nat Genet 36:S21–S27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tishkoff S, Verreli B (2003) Patterns of human genetic diversity: implications for human evolutionary history and disease. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet 4:293–340PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Xie H, Kim R, Wood A, Stein C (2001) Molecular basis of ethnic differences in drug disposition and response. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 41:815–850PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Xu X, Peng M, Fang Z, Xu X (2000) The direction of microsatellite mutations is dependent upon allele length. Nat Genet 24:396–399PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zhivotovsky L, Rosenberg N, Feldman M (2003) Features of evolution and expansion of modern humans, inferred from genomewide microsatellite markers. Am J Hum Genet 72:1171–1186PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea Manica
    • 1
  • Franck Prugnolle
    • 2
  • François Balloux
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Evolutionary Ecology Group, Department of ZoologyUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
  2. 2.Theoretical and Molecular Population Genetics group, Department of GeneticsUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeEngland
  3. 3.Department of GeneticsUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations