Multi-polygenic score prediction of mathematics, reading, and language abilities independent of general cognitive ability.

Specific cognitive abilities (SCA) correlate genetically about 0.50, which underpins general cognitive ability (g), but it also means that there is considerable genetic specificity. If g is not controlled, then genomic prediction of specific cognitive abilities is not truly specific because they are all perfused with g. Here, we investigated the heritability of mathematics, reading, and language ability independent of g (SCA.g) using twins and DNA, and the extent to which multiple genome-wide polygenic scores (multi-PGS) can jointly predict these SCA.g as compared to SCA uncorrected for g. We created SCA and SCA.g composites from a battery of 14 cognitive tests administered at age 12 to 5,000 twin pairs in the Twins Early Development Study (TEDS). Univariate twin analyses yielded an average heritability estimate of 40% for SCA.g, compared to 53% for uncorrected SCA. Using genome-wide SNP genotypes, average SNP-based heritabilities were 26% for SCA.g and 35% for SCA. We then created multi-PGS from at least 50 PGS to predict each SCA and SCA.g using elastic net penalised regression models. Multi-PGS predicted 4.4% of the variance of SCA.g on average, compared to 11.1% for SCA uncorrected for g. The twin, SNP and PGS heritability estimates for SCA.g provide further evidence that the heritabilities of SCA are not merely a reflection of g. Although the relative reduction in heritability from SCA to SCA.g was greater for PGS heritability than for twin or SNP heritability, this decrease is likely due to the paucity of PGS for SCA. We hope that these results encourage researchers to conduct genome-wide association studies of SCA, and especially SCA.g, that can be used to predict PGS profiles of SCA strengths and weaknesses independent of g.

Examining intergenerational risk factors for conduct problems using polygenic scores in the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study.

The aetiology of conduct problems involves a combination of genetic and environmental factors, many of which are inherently linked to parental characteristics given parents' central role in children's lives across development. It is important to disentangle to what extent links between parental heritable characteristics and children's behaviour are due to transmission of genetic risk or due to parental indirect genetic influences via the environment (i.e., genetic nurture). We used 31,290 genotyped mother-father-child trios from the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study (MoBa), testing genetic transmission and genetic nurture effects on conduct problems using 13 polygenic scores (PGS) spanning psychiatric conditions, substance use, education-related factors, and other risk factors. Maternal or self-reports of conduct problems at ages 8 and 14 years were available for up to 15,477 children. We found significant genetic transmission effects on conduct problems for 12 out of 13 PGS at age 8 years (strongest association: PGS for smoking, ß = 0.07, 95% confidence interval = [0.05, 0.08]) and for 4 out of 13 PGS at age 14 years (strongest association: PGS for externalising problems, ß = 0.08, 95% confidence interval = [0.05, 0.11]). Conversely, we did not find genetic nurture effects for conduct problems using our selection of PGS. Our findings provide evidence for genetic transmission in the association between parental characteristics and child conduct problems. Our results may also indicate that genetic nurture via traits indexed by our polygenic scores is of limited aetiological importance for conduct problems-though effects of small magnitude or effects via parental traits not captured by the included PGS remain a possibility.

Genotype-Environment Interaction in ADHD: Genetic Predisposition Determines the Extent to Which Environmental Influences Explain Variability in the Symptom Dimensions Hyperactivity and Inattention.

Although earlier research has shown that individual differences on the spectrum of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are highly heritable, emerging evidence suggests that symptoms are associated with complex interactions between genes and environmental influences. This study investigated whether a genetic predisposition [Note that the term 'genetic predisposition' was used in this manuscript to refer to an estimate based on twin modeling (an individual's score on the latent trait that resembles additive genetic influences) in the particular population being examined.] for the symptom dimensions hyperactivity and inattention determines the extent to which unique-environmental influences explain variability in these symptoms. To this purpose, we analysed a sample drawn from the Twins Early Development Study (TEDS) that consisted of item-level scores of 2168 16-year-old twin pairs who completed both the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; Goodman, in J Child Psychol Psychiatry 38:581-586, 1997) and the Strength and Weaknesses of ADHD Symptoms and Normal Behavior (SWAN; Swanson, in Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles, 1981) questionnaire. To maximize the psychometric information to measure ADHD symptoms, psychometric analyses were performed to investigate whether the items from the two questionnaires could be combined to form two longer subscales. In the estimation of genotype-environment interaction, we corrected for error variance heterogeneity in the measurement of ADHD symptoms through the application of item response theory (IRT) measurement models. A positive interaction was found for both hyperactivity (e.g., [Formula: see text] = 2.20 with 95% highest posterior density interval equal to [1.79;2.65] and effect size equal to 3.00) and inattention (e.g., [Formula: see text] = 2.16 with 95% highest posterior density interval equal to [1.56;2.79] and effect size equal to 3.07). These results indicate that unique-environmental influences were more important in creating individual differences in both hyperactivity and inattention for twins with a genetic predisposition for these symptoms than for twins without such a predisposition.

Comparing findings from the random-intercept cross-lagged panel model and the monozygotic twin difference cross-lagged panel model: Maladaptive parenting and offspring emotional and behavioural problems.

Background: In this study we compare results obtained when applying the monozygotic twin difference cross-lagged panel model (MZD-CLPM) and a random intercept cross-lagged panel model (RI-CLPM) to the same data. Each of these models is designed to strengthen researchers' ability to draw causal inference from cross-lagged associations. We explore differences and similarities in how each model does this, and in the results each model produces. Specifically, we examine associations between maladaptive parenting and child emotional and behavioural problems in identical twins aged 9, 12 and 16. Method: Child reports of 5698 identical twins from the Twins Early Development Study (TEDS) were analysed. We ran a regular CLPM to anchor our findings within the current literature, then applied the MZD-CLPM and the RI-CLPM. Results: The RI-CLPM and MZD-CLPM each enable researchers to evaluate the direction of effects between correlated variables, after accounting for unmeasured sources of potential confounding. Our interpretation of these models therefore focusses primarily on the magnitude and significance of cross-lagged associations. In both the MZD-CLPM and the RI-CLPM behavioural problems at age 9 resulted in higher levels of maladaptive parenting at age 12. Other effects were not consistently significant across the two models, although the majority of estimates pointed in the same direction. Conclusion: In light of the triangulated methods, differences in the results obtained using the MZD-CLPM and the RI-CLPM underline the importance of careful consideration of what sources of unmeasured confounding different models control for and that nuance is required when interpreting findings using such models. We provide an overview of what the CLPM, RI-CLPM and MZD-CLPM can and cannot control for in this respect and the conclusions that can be drawn from each model.

Polygenic Scores and Networks of Psychopathology Symptoms.

Importance: Studies on polygenic risk for psychiatric traits commonly use a disorder-level approach to phenotyping, implicitly considering disorders as homogeneous constructs; however, symptom heterogeneity is ubiquitous, with many possible combinations of symptoms falling under the same disorder umbrella. Focusing on individual symptoms may shed light on the role of polygenic risk in psychopathology. Objective: To determine whether polygenic scores are associated with all symptoms of psychiatric disorders or with a subset of indicators and whether polygenic scores are associated with comorbid phenotypes via specific sets of relevant symptoms. Design, Setting, and Participants: Data from 2 population-based cohort studies were used in this cross-sectional study. Data from children in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) were included in the primary analysis, and data from children in the Twins Early Development Study (TEDS) were included in confirmatory analyses. Data analysis was conducted from October 2021 to January 2024. Pregnant women based in the Southwest of England due to deliver in 1991 to 1992 were recruited in ALSPAC. Twins born in 1994 to 1996 were recruited in TEDS from population-based records. Participants with available genetic data and whose mothers completed the Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire and the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire when children were 11 years of age were included. Main Outcomes and Measures: Psychopathology relevant symptoms, such as hyperactivity, prosociality, depression, anxiety, and peer and conduct problems at age 11 years. Psychological networks were constructed including individual symptoms and polygenic scores for depression, anxiety, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), body mass index (BMI), and educational attainment in ALSPAC. Following a preregistered confirmatory analysis, network models were cross-validated in TEDS. Results: Included were 5521 participants from ALSPAC (mean [SD] age, 11.8 [0.14] years; 2777 [50.3%] female) and 4625 participants from TEDS (mean [SD] age, 11.27 [0.69] years; 2460 [53.2%] female). Polygenic scores were preferentially associated with restricted subsets of core symptoms and indirectly associated with other, more distal symptoms of psychopathology (network edges ranged between r = -0.074 and r = 0.073). Psychiatric polygenic scores were associated with specific cross-disorder symptoms, and nonpsychiatric polygenic scores were associated with a variety of indicators across disorders, suggesting a potential contribution of nonpsychiatric traits to comorbidity. For example, the polygenic score for ADHD was associated with a core ADHD symptom, being easily distracted (r = 0.07), and the polygenic score for BMI was associated with symptoms across disorders, including being bullied (r = 0.053) and not thinking things out (r = 0.041). Conclusions and Relevance: Genetic associations observed at the disorder level may hide symptom-level heterogeneity. A symptom-level approach may enable a better understanding of the role of polygenic risk in shaping psychopathology and comorbidity.

Genetic and phenotypic heterogeneity in early neurodevelopmental traits in the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Autism and different neurodevelopmental conditions frequently co-occur, as do their symptoms at sub-diagnostic threshold levels. Overlapping traits and shared genetic liability are potential explanations. METHODS: In the population-based Norwegian Mother, Father, and Child Cohort study (MoBa), we leverage item-level data to explore the phenotypic factor structure and genetic architecture underlying neurodevelopmental traits at age 3 years (N = 41,708-58,630) using maternal reports on 76 items assessing children's motor and language development, social functioning, communication, attention, activity regulation, and flexibility of behaviors and interests. RESULTS: We identified 11 latent factors at the phenotypic level. These factors showed associations with diagnoses of autism and other neurodevelopmental conditions. Most shared genetic liabilities with autism, ADHD, and/or schizophrenia. Item-level GWAS revealed trait-specific genetic correlations with autism (items rg range = - 0.27-0.78), ADHD (items rg range = - 0.40-1), and schizophrenia (items rg range = - 0.24-0.34). We find little evidence of common genetic liability across all neurodevelopmental traits but more so for several genetic factors across more specific areas of neurodevelopment, particularly social and communication traits. Some of these factors, such as one capturing prosocial behavior, overlap with factors found in the phenotypic analyses. Other areas, such as motor development, seemed to have more heterogenous etiology, with specific traits showing a less consistent pattern of genetic correlations with each other. CONCLUSIONS: These exploratory findings emphasize the etiological complexity of neurodevelopmental traits at this early age. In particular, diverse associations with neurodevelopmental conditions and genetic heterogeneity could inform follow-up work to identify shared and differentiating factors in the early manifestations of neurodevelopmental traits and their relation to autism and other neurodevelopmental conditions. This in turn could have implications for clinical screening tools and programs.