Advertisement

Behavior Genetics

, 35:707 | Cite as

Widespread Evidence for Non-Additive Genetic Variation in Cloninger’s and Eysenck’s Personality Dimensions using a Twin Plus Sibling Design

  • Matthew C. KellerEmail author
  • William L. Coventry
  • Andrew C. Heath
  • Nicholas G. Martin
Article

Abstract

Studies using the classical twin design often conclude that most genetic variation underlying personality is additive in nature. However, studies analyzing only twins are very limited in their ability to detect non-additive genetic variation and are unable to detect sources of variation unique to twins, which can mask non-additive genetic variation. The current study assessed 9672 MZ and DZ twin individuals and 3241 of their siblings to investigate the environmental and genetic architecture underlying eight dimensions of personality: four from Eysenck’s Personality Questionnaire and four from Cloninger’s Temperament and Character Inventory. Broad-sense heritability estimates from best-fitting models were two to three times greater than the narrow-sense heritability estimates for Harm Avoidance, Novelty Seeking, Reward Dependence, Persistence, Extraversion, and Neuroticism. This genetic non-additivity could be due to dominance, additive-by-additive epistasis, or to additive genetic effects combined with higher-order epistasis. Environmental effects unique to twins were detected for both Lie and Psychoticism but accounted for little overall variation. Our results illustrate the increased sensitivity afforded by extending the classical twin design to include siblings, and may provide clues to the evolutionary origins of genetic variation underlying personality.

Keywords

Behavior genetics dominance epistasis non-additive genetic variation personality 

References

  1. Boomsma, D. I., Martin, N. G. 2002Gene–environment interactions’haenen, H. D.Boer, J. A.Willner, P. eds. Biological psychiatryJohn Wiley and SonsNew York181187Google Scholar
  2. Bouchard, T. J., Lykken, D. T., McGue, M., Segal, N., Tellegen, A. 1990Sources of human psychological differences: The Minnesota Study of Twins Reared ApartScience250223228PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Carey, G. 1986Sibling imitation and contrast effectsBehav. Genet.16319342CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Cloninger, C. R. 1994The Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI): A Guide to its Development and UseCentre for Psychobiology of PersonalitySt. Louis, MOGoogle Scholar
  5. Cloninger, C. R., Przybeck, T. R., Svrakic, D. M. 1991The Tridimensional Personality Questionnaire: U.S. normative dataPsychol. Rep.6910471057PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Coventry, W.L. and Keller, M. C. (2005). Estimating the extent of parameter bias in the classical twin design: a comparison of parameter estimates from extended twin-family and classical twin designs. Twin Res. Human Genet., 8:214–223.Google Scholar
  7. Curtisinger, J. W., Service, P. M., Prout, T. 1994Antagonistic pleiotropy, reversal of dominance, and genetic polymorphismAm. Nat.144210228Google Scholar
  8. Dolan, C. V., Boomsma, D. I., Neale, M. C. 1999A note on the power provided by sibships of sizes 2, 3, and 4 in genetic covariance modeling of a codominant QTLBehav. Genet.29163170CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Eaves, L. J. 1976A model fo sibling effects in manHeredity36205214PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Eaves, L. J.Eysenck, H. J.Martin, J. M. eds. 1989Genes, culture, and personality: an empirical approachAcademic PressLondongGoogle Scholar
  11. Eaves, L. J. 1988Dominance alone is not enoughBehav. Genet8201213Google Scholar
  12. Eaves, L. J., Heath, A. C., Martin, N. G., Maes, H. H., Neale, M. C., Kendler, K. S.,  et al. 1999Comparing the biological and cultural inheritance of personality and social attitudes in the Virginia 30,000 study of twins and their relativesTwin Res.26280PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Eaves, L. J., Heath, A. C., Neale, M. C., Hewitt, J. K., Martin, N. G. 1998Sex differences and non-additivity in the effects of genes on personalityTwin Res.1131137CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Eaves, L. J., Last, K., Martin, J. M., Jinks, J. L. 1977A progressive approach to non-additivity and genotype-environmental covariance in the analysis of human differencesBr.␣J. Math. Stat.30142Google Scholar
  15. Eysenck, H. J., Eysenck, S. B. G., Barrett, P. 1985A revised version of the Psychoticism scalePerson. Ind. Diff.762129Google Scholar
  16. Falconer, D. S., Mackay, T. F. C. 1996Introduction to Quantitative Genetics4Addison Wesley LongmanHarlow, Essex, UKGoogle Scholar
  17. Fisher, R. A. 1930The Genetical Theory of Natural SelectionClarendon PressOxford, UKGoogle Scholar
  18. Frankel, W. N., Schork, N. J. 1996Who’s afraid of epistasisNat. Genet.14371373CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Gillespie, N. A., Cloninger, C. R., Heath, A. C., Martin, N. G. 2003The genetic and environmental relationship between Cloninger’s dimensions of temperament and characterPerson. Ind. Differ.3519311946Google Scholar
  20. Heath, A. C., Cloninger, C. R., Martin, N. G. 1994aTesting a model for the genetic structure of personality: a comparison of the personality systems of Cloninger and EysenkJ. Person. Soc. Psychol.66762775Google Scholar
  21. Heath, A. C., Madden, P. A., Cloninger, C. R., Martin, N. G. 1994bGenetic and environmental structure of personalityCloninger, C. R. eds. Personality and psychopathologyAmerican Psychiatric PressWashington, DCGoogle Scholar
  22. Heiman, N., Stallings, M. C., Young, S. E., Hewitt, J. K. 2004Investigating the genetic and environmental structure of Cloninger’s personality dimensions in adolescenceTwin Res.7462470CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Huntley, R. M. C. 1966Heritability of intelligenceMeade, J. E.Parkes, A. S. eds. Genetic and environmental factors in human abilityOliver and BoydEdinburghGoogle Scholar
  24. Keller, M. C. and Coventry, W. L. (2005). Quantifying and addressing parameter indeterminacy in the classical twin design. Twin Res. Human Genet., 8:201–213.Google Scholar
  25. Kendler, K. S. 1983Overview: a current perspective on twin studies of schizophreniaAm. J. Psychiatry14014131425PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Lake, R. I. E., Eaves, L. J., Maes, H. H., Heath, A. C., Martin, N. G. 2000Further evidence against the environmental transmission of individual differences in neuroticism from a collaborative study of 45,850 twins and relatives on two continentsBehav. Genet.30223233CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Li, W., Reich, J. W. 2000A complete enumeration and classification of two-locus disease modelsHuman Heredity50334349PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Loehlin, J. C., Willerman, L., Horn, J. 1985Personality resemblances in adoptive families when the children are late-adolescent or adultJ. Person. Soc. Psychol.48376392Google Scholar
  29. Lykken, D. T., McGue, M., Tellegen, A., Bouchard, T. J. 1992Emergenesis: genetic traits that may not run in familiesAm. Psychol.4715651577CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Martin, N. G., Eaves, L. J., Kearsey, M. J., Davies, P. 1978The power of the classical twin studyHeredity287995Google Scholar
  31. Mather, K. 1974Non-allelic interaction in continuous variation of randomly breeding populationsHeredity32414419PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Medland, S. E. 2004Alternate parameterization for scalar and non-scalar sex-limitation models in MXTwin Res.7299305PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Merilä, J., Sheldon, B. C. 1999Genetic architecture of fitness and nonfitness traits: empirical patterns and development of ideasHeredity83103109PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Mulder, R. T., Joyce, P. R. 1997Temperament and the structure of personality disorder symptomsPsychol. Med.2799106CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Mulder, R. T., Joyce, P. R., Sullivan, P. F., Bulik, C. M., Carter, F. A. 1999The relationship among three models of personality psychopathology: DSM-III-R personality disorder, TCI scores and DSQ defencesPsychol. Med.29943951CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Munafo, M. R., Clark, T. G., Moore, L. R., Payne, E., Walton, R., Flint, J. 2003Genetic polymorphisms and personality in healthy adults: a systematic review and meta-analysisMol. Psychiatry8471484PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Neale, M. C. 1999MX: Statistical Modelling5Department of PsychiatryRichmond, VAGoogle Scholar
  38. Ooki, S., Yamada, K., Asaka, A., Hayakawa, K. 1990Zygosity diagnosis of twins by questionnaireActa Genet. Med. Gemel. (Roma)39109115Google Scholar
  39. Posthuma, D., Boomsma, D. 2000A note on the statistical power in extended twin designsBehav. Genet.30147158PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Purcell, S., Sham, P. C. 2004Epistasis in quantitative trait locus linkage analysis: interaction or main effect?Behav. Genet.34143151CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Roff, D. A., Mousseau, T. A. 1987Quantitative genetics and fitnessHeredity58103118PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Stallings, M. C., Hewitt, J. K., Cloninger, C. R., Heath, A. C., Eaves, L. J. 1996Genetic and environmental structure of the Tridimensional Personality Questionnaire: three or four temperamental dimensions?J. Person. Soc. Psychol.70127140Google Scholar
  43. Tellegen, A., Lykken, D. T., Bouchard, T. J., Wilcox, K. J., Segal, N., Rich, S. 1988Personality similarity in twins reared apart and togetherJ. Person. Soc. Psychol.5410311039Google Scholar
  44. Wang, K., Huang, J. 2002Score test for mapping quantitative-trait loci with sibships of arbitrary size when the dominance effect is not negligibleGenet. Epidemiol.23398412CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Watson, D. 2004Stability versus change, dependability versus error: issues in the assessment of personality over timeJ. Res. Person.38319350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zhu, G., Evans, D. M., Duffy, D. L., Montgomery, G. W., Medland, S. E., Gillespie, N. A. 2004A genome scan for eye color in 502 twin families: most variation is due to a QTL on Chromosome 15qTwin Res.7197210CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthew C. Keller
    • 1
    Email author
  • William L. Coventry
    • 2
  • Andrew C. Heath
    • 3
  • Nicholas G. Martin
    • 2
  1. 1.Center for Society and Genetics (UCLA)University of CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.Queensland Institute of Medical ResearchBrisbaneAustralia
  3. 3.Department of PsychiatryWashington UniversitySt. LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations