Biological insights into multiple birth: genetic findings from UK Biobank

Abstract

The tendency to conceive spontaneous dizygotic (DZ) twins is a complex trait with important contributions from both environmental factors and genetic disposition. In earlier work, we identified the first two genes as maternal susceptibility loci for DZ twinning. The aim of this study was to identify genetic variants influencing multiple births and to genetically correlate the findings across a broad range of traits. We performed a genome-wide association study (GWAS) in 8962 participants with Caucasian ancestry from UK Biobank who reported being part of a multiple birth, and 409,591 singleton controls. We replicated the association between FSHB, SMAD3 and twinning in the gene-based (but not SNP-based) test, which had been established in previous genome-wide association analyses in mothers with dizygotic twin offspring. Additionally, we report a novel genetic variant associated with multiple birth, rs428022 at 15q23 (p = 2.84 × 10−8) close to two genes: PIAS1 and SKOR1. Finally, we identified meaningful genetic correlations between being part of a multiple birth and other phenotypes (anthropometric traits, health-related traits, and fertility-related measures). The outcomes of this study provide important new insights into the genetic aetiology of multiple births and fertility, and open up novel directions for fertility and reproduction research.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. 1.

    Blondel B, Kogan MD, Alexander GR, Dattani N, Kramer MS, Macfarlane A, et al. The impact of the increasing number of multiple births on the rates of preterm birth and low birthweight: an international study. Am J Public Health. 2002;92:1323–30.

  2. 2.

    The ESHRE Capri Workshop Group. Multiple gestation pregnancy. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:1856–64.

  3. 3.

    Hoekstra C, Zhao ZZ, Lambalk CB, et al. Dizygotic twinning. Hum Reprod Update. 2008;14:37–47.

  4. 4.

    Smits J, Monden C. Twinning across the developing world. PLoS ONE. 2011;6:e25239.

  5. 5.

    Sunderam S, Kissin DM, Crawford SB, et al. Assisted reproductive technology surveillance — United States, 2015. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2018;67:1–28.

  6. 6.

    Beemsterboer SN, Homburg R, Gorter NA, Schats R, PGA Hompes, Lambalk CB. The paradox of declining fertility but increasing twinning rates with advancing maternal age. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:1531–32.

  7. 7.

    Bulmer MG. The biology of twinning in man. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1970.

  8. 8.

    Parisi P, Gatti M, Prinzi G, Caperna G. Familial incidence of twinning. Nature. 1983;304:626–8.

  9. 9.

    Meulemans WJ, Lewis CM, Boomsma DI, et al. Genetic modelling of dizygotic twinning in pedigrees of spontaneous dizygotic twins. Am J Med Genet. 1996;61:258–63.

  10. 10.

    Mbarek H, Steinberg S, Nyholt DR, et al. Identification of common genetic variants influencing spontaneous dizygotic twinning and female fertility. Am J Hum Genet. 2016;98:898–908.

  11. 11.

    Mbarek H, Dolan CV, Boomsma DI. Two SNPs associated with spontaneous dizygotic twinning: effect sizes and how we communicate them. Twin Res Hum Genet. 2016;19:418–21.

  12. 12.

    Sudlow C, Gallacher J, Allen N, et al. UK Biobank: an open access resource for identifying the causes of a wide range of complex diseases of middle and old age. PLoS Med. 2015;12:e1001779.

  13. 13.

    Bycroft C, Freeman C, Petkova D, et al. The UK Biobank resource with deep phenotyping and genomic data. Nature. 2018;562:203–9.

  14. 14.

    Winkler TW, Day FR, Croteau-Chonka DC, et al. Quality control and conduct of genome-wide association meta-analyses. Nat Protoc. 2014;9:1192–212.

  15. 15.

    Chang CC, Chow CC, Tellier LC, Vattikuti S, Purcell SM, Lee JJ. Second-generation PLINK: rising to the challenge of larger and richer datasets. Gigascience. 2015;4:7.

  16. 16.

    Baselmans BML, Jansen R, Ip HF, van Dongen J, Abdellaoui A, van de Weijer MP, et al. Multivariate genome-wide analyses of the well-being spectrum. Nat Genet. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-018-0320-8

  17. 17.

    Watanabe K, Taskesen E, van Bochoven A, Posthuma D. Functional mapping and annotation of genetic associations with FUMA. Nat Commun. 2017;8:1826.

  18. 18.

    Pruim RJ, Welch RP, Sanna S, et al. LocusZoom: regional visualization of genome-wide association scan results. Bioinformatics. 2010;26:2336–37.

  19. 19.

    de Leeuw CA, Mooij JM, Heskes T, Posthuma D. MAGMA: generalized gene-set analysis of GWAS data. PLoS Comput Biol. 2015;11:e1004219.

  20. 20.

    Zheng J, Erzurumluoglu AM, Elsworth BL, et al. LD Hub: a centralized database and web interface to perform LD score regression that maximizes the potential of summary level GWAS data for SNP heritability and genetic correlation analysis. Bioinformatics. 2017;33:272–9.

  21. 21.

    Bulik-Sullivan BK, Loh P-R, Finucane HK, et al. LD score regression distinguishes confounding from polygenicity in genome-wide association studies. Nat Genet. 2015;47:291–5.

  22. 22.

    Wickham H. Ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer, 2009.

  23. 23.

    R Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2013.

  24. 24.

    Rull K, Grigorova M, Ehrenberg A, et al. FSHB -211 G>T is a major genetic modulator of reproductive physiology and health in childbearing age women. Hum Reprod. 2018;33:954–66.

  25. 25.

    Heinlein CA, Chang C. Androgen receptor in prostate cancer. Endocr Rev. 2004;25:276–308.

  26. 26.

    Puhr M, Hoefer J, Eigentler A, et al. PIAS1 is a determinant of poor survival and acts as a positive feedback regulator of AR signaling through enhanced AR stabilization in prostate cancer. Oncogene. 2016;35:2322–32.

  27. 27.

    Hoefer J, Schäfer G, Klocker H, et al. PIAS1 is increased in human prostate cancer and enhances proliferation through inhibition of p21. Am J Pathol. 2012;180:2097–107.

  28. 28.

    Dohle GR, Smit M, Weber RFA. Androgens and male fertility. World J Urol. 2003;21:341–5.

  29. 29.

    Ferlin A, Vinanzi C, Garolla A, et al. Male infertility and androgen receptor gene mutations: clinical features and identification of seven novel mutations. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2006;65:606–10.

  30. 30.

    Liang M, Melchior F, Feng X-H, Lin X. Regulation of Smad4 sumoylation and transforming growth factor-β signaling by protein inhibitor of activated STAT1. J Biol Chem. 2004;279:22857–65.

  31. 31.

    Long J, Matsuura I, He D, Wang G, Shuai K, Liu F. Repression of Smad transcriptional activity by PIASy, an inhibitor of activated STAT. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100:9791–6.

  32. 32.

    Arndt S, Poser I, Moser M, Bosserhoff A-K.Fussel-15, a novel Ski/Sno homolog protein, antagonizes BMP signaling. Mol Cell Neurosci. 2007;34:603–11.

  33. 33.

    Fabre S, Pierre A, Mulsant P, et al. Regulation of ovulation rate in mammals: contribution of sheep genetic models. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2006;4:20.

  34. 34.

    Harris RA, Tardif SD, Vinar T, et al. Evolutionary genetics and implications of small size and twinning in callitrichine primates. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111:1467–72.

  35. 35.

    Westendorp RGJ, Kirkwood TBL. Human longevity at the cost of reproductive success. Nature. 1998;396:743–6.

  36. 36.

    Byars SG, Huang QQ, Gray L-A, et al. Genetic loci associated with coronary artery disease harbor evidence of selection and antagonistic pleiotropy. PLoS Genet. 2017;13:e1006328.

  37. 37.

    Corbett S, Courtiol A, Lummaa V, Moorad J, Stearns S. The transition to modernity and chronic disease: mismatch and natural selection. Nat Rev Genet 2018;1:419–30.

  38. 38.

    Yengo L, Yang J, Visscher PM. Expectation of the intercept from bivariate LD score regression in the presence of population stratification. bioRxiv 2018:310565. https://doi.org/10.1101/310565

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research has been conducted using the UK Biobank Resource under application number 25472 (PI Bartels). HM and MDvdZ were supported through the VU-Avera Collaborative Agreement between the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and the Avera McKennan d/b/a Avera Institute for Human Genetics. MPvdW was supported by a University Research Fellow (URF) of the Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam to DIB. MGN was supported by a Royal Netherlands Academy of Science Professor Award to DIB (PAH/6635), ZonMw grant: “Genetics as a research tool: A natural experiment to elucidate the causal effects of social mobility on health.” (pnr: 531003014) and ZonMw project: “Can sex- and gender-specific gene expression and epigenetics explain sex-differences in disease prevalence and etiology?” (pnr: 849200011). HFI was supported by the “Aggression in Children: Unraveling gene-environment interplay to inform Treatment and InterventiON strategies” (ACTION) project. ACTION receives funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Program (FP7/2007–2013) under grant agreement no 602768. Computational facilities on Cartesius were supplied by NWO via the grant: “Population scale genetic analysis” 2018/EW/00408559.

Author information

Correspondence to Hamdi Mbarek.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mbarek, H., van de Weijer, M.P., van der Zee, M.D. et al. Biological insights into multiple birth: genetic findings from UK Biobank. Eur J Hum Genet 27, 970–979 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-019-0355-z

Download citation