About
Last updated: 2021-09-14
Checks: 6 1
Knit directory: proxyMR/
This reproducible R Markdown analysis was created with workflowr (version 1.6.2). The Checks tab describes the reproducibility checks that were applied when the results were created. The Past versions tab lists the development history.
The R Markdown file has unstaged changes. To know which version of the R Markdown file created these results, you’ll want to first commit it to the Git repo. If you’re still working on the analysis, you can ignore this warning. When you’re finished, you can run wflow_publish to commit the R Markdown file and build the HTML.
Great job! The global environment was empty. Objects defined in the global environment can affect the analysis in your R Markdown file in unknown ways. For reproduciblity it’s best to always run the code in an empty environment.
The command set.seed(20210602) was run prior to running the code in the R Markdown file. Setting a seed ensures that any results that rely on randomness, e.g. subsampling or permutations, are reproducible.
Great job! Recording the operating system, R version, and package versions is critical for reproducibility.
Nice! There were no cached chunks for this analysis, so you can be confident that you successfully produced the results during this run.
Great job! Using relative paths to the files within your workflowr project makes it easier to run your code on other machines.
Great! You are using Git for version control. Tracking code development and connecting the code version to the results is critical for reproducibility.
The results in this page were generated with repository version 7f198c6. See the Past versions tab to see a history of the changes made to the R Markdown and HTML files.
Note that you need to be careful to ensure that all relevant files for the analysis have been committed to Git prior to generating the results (you can use wflow_publish or wflow_git_commit). workflowr only checks the R Markdown file, but you know if there are other scripts or data files that it depends on. Below is the status of the Git repository when the results were generated:
Ignored files:
Ignored: .DS_Store
Ignored: .Rhistory
Ignored: .Rproj.user/
Ignored: fig_test.RData
Ignored: household_MR_exhaustive_summary.rds
Ignored: proxyMR_comparison.RData
Ignored: proxyMR_figure_data.RData
Ignored: renv/library/
Ignored: renv/local/
Ignored: renv/staging/
Ignored: traits_corr2_update.rds
Untracked files:
Untracked: R/proxyMR_figures.R
Untracked: R/proxyMR_hiercharchy.R
Unstaged changes:
Modified: analysis/about.Rmd
Modified: analysis/index.Rmd
Modified: analysis/update_meeting_06_09_2021.Rmd
Modified: analysis/update_meeting_14_06_2021.Rmd
Modified: analysis/update_meeting_14_07_2021.Rmd
Note that any generated files, e.g. HTML, png, CSS, etc., are not included in this status report because it is ok for generated content to have uncommitted changes.
These are the previous versions of the repository in which changes were made to the R Markdown (analysis/about.Rmd) and HTML (docs/about.html) files. If you’ve configured a remote Git repository (see ?wflow_git_remote), click on the hyperlinks in the table below to view the files as they were in that past version.
| File | Version | Author | Date | Message |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| html | a55da5b | jennysjaarda | 2021-07-22 | Build site. |
| Rmd | e1aeb5f | jennysjaarda | 2021-06-02 | Start workflowr project. |
1 Background
Sharing environment with others plays an important role on our behaviors and health outcomes.
1.1 Assortative mating
- Observation of increased phenotypic similarity between couples compared to random pairs.
- This is most prominent in anthropometric traits, such as BMI and height, measures of SES and various behavioral and lifestyle measures (diet, interests, hobbies, etc.).
- This is because people tend to choose partners more similar to themselves (i.e. opposites do not actually attract in reality).
- There is also genetic evidence of assortative mating, meaning couples are not only more phenotypically similar but also more genetically similar (see Genetic evidence of assortative mating in humans [Matt Robinson] and Genetic determination of height-mediated mate choice [Albert Tenesa])
1.2 Couple convergence
- Additionally, couples living together can become even more similar over the years.
- Unknown to what extent couples converge and influence each other over time.
- Complicated by the fact that people tend to choose partners that are also geographically closer to them, which induces both genetic adn phenotypic similarity.
1.3 Horizontal indirect genetic effects
- Indirect genetic effects (IGEs): the effect of a genotype of one individual on the phenotype of other individuals.
- Vertical IGEs: IGEs across generation.
- For example, maternal genetic effects on their offspring phenotypes (such as birthweight).
- Non-transmitted parental genotypes have also been described to influence offspring phenotypes (e.g. educational attainment).
- Suggest vertical IGEs can be mediated through both biological and social beahviors.
- Horizontal IGEs: IGEs within generation.
- Reported for school friends in relation to educational attainment.
- Unknown how much these observations are spread across traits, particularly in partners and siblings.
- Tenesa et al. sought to identify evidence of IGEs in UKB couples.
- Used linear mixed models to estimate partner indirect heritability and found evidence of partner heritability on ~50% of traits.
- Further analyses suggested that for at least ~25% of these traits, the partner heritability is consistent with the existence of indirect genetic effects.
2 Objectives
- Identify traits which are directly assorted for. In other words, which traits are responsible for the phenotypic similarity we observe amongst couples. In the case of similarity observed with respect to both diet and BMI, perhaps one phenotype is driving the similarity between couples and the other is either indirect or a confounder (as diet and BMI are themselves correlated).
- Do these patterns differ amongst sex (i.e. are females or males more particular with respect to certain traits)?
- Is there evidence for these patterns changing with age?
- Can we find evidence for convergence overtime?
- What are the traits that are responsible for the path from an exposure in an index case impacting an outcome in their partner?
sessionInfo()R version 4.1.0 (2021-05-18)
Platform: aarch64-apple-darwin20 (64-bit)
Running under: macOS Big Sur 11.5.2
Matrix products: default
BLAS: /Library/Frameworks/R.framework/Versions/4.1-arm64/Resources/lib/libRblas.dylib
LAPACK: /Library/Frameworks/R.framework/Versions/4.1-arm64/Resources/lib/libRlapack.dylib
locale:
[1] en_CA.UTF-8/en_CA.UTF-8/en_CA.UTF-8/C/en_CA.UTF-8/en_CA.UTF-8
attached base packages:
[1] stats graphics grDevices utils datasets methods base
other attached packages:
[1] knitr_1.33
loaded via a namespace (and not attached):
[1] Rcpp_1.0.7 whisker_0.4 magrittr_2.0.1 workflowr_1.6.2
[5] R6_2.5.0 rlang_0.4.11 fansi_0.5.0 highr_0.9
[9] stringr_1.4.0 tools_4.1.0 xfun_0.23 utf8_1.2.1
[13] git2r_0.28.0 htmltools_0.5.1.1 ellipsis_0.3.2 rprojroot_2.0.2
[17] yaml_2.2.1 digest_0.6.27 tibble_3.1.2 lifecycle_1.0.0
[21] crayon_1.4.1 later_1.2.0 vctrs_0.3.8 promises_1.2.0.1
[25] fs_1.5.0 glue_1.4.2 evaluate_0.14 rmarkdown_2.10
[29] stringi_1.6.2 compiler_4.1.0 pillar_1.6.1 httpuv_1.6.1
[33] pkgconfig_2.0.3