Talk:Gene–environment interaction

message: rated by T0mpr1c3 (talk) 10:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This entry is way too psychology-biased at the moment. I'm fairly certain that gene-environment interactions were talked about in biology several decades earlier than the article currently says of psychology (1990s; biology: 1950s? I'm thinking Waddington). - Samsara 16:03, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Psychology bias

message: While we're at it, could this page not be merged/redirected to heritability or nature versus nurture?  it's really short, and I'm not sure where it's intended to go that would cover ground not properly covered on those pages. Pete.Hurd 06:01, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge?

message: I wonder if there isn't a way to make a few remarks on the distinction of pre-natal and post-natal environments.  Either one clearly falls in the category "environment", but I think many readers will tend to forget about pre-natal environment as a entering into the interactional quality of development.  Maybe some reference to the Francis, et al. paper that you sent me, Pete.Hurd (Epigentetic sources of behaviral differences in mice), which was interesting in considering both environments along with gene strains. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 21:24, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I'll put some thought into some text, I don't have time to make a nifty graphical description of the Francis paper, but I think it would be super-useful to triple underline the idea that "born that way" does not equal "genetics" due to the importance of uterine environment effects.  Maybe some mention of how MZ twins that share a single amniotic sac are more similar than MZ twins that each had their own... I'll see if I can find that reference too. Pete.Hurd 23:01, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Pete, I'd say that twin studies with information on chorionicity have generally been too small to draw any firm conclusions about postnatal similarity, but it is true that monochorionic twin pairs have higher rates of perinatal complications T0mpr1c3 (talk) 00:45, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

text: Hey Lulu, I was thinking that "prenatal" environmental influences are seen in oviparous species.  For example maternal effects, such as differential deposition of hormones into the egg, in birds and lizards.  Birds have been known to alter hormone concentrations in the egg across the clutch, increasing or decreasing testosterone with laying order.  A recent paper (IIRC) showed the sex ratio of the other eggs in experimentally assembled clutches of lizard eggs influenced adult morphology... Pete.Hurd (talk) 03:48, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a sentence on oviparous species.  Does it look sensible to you? LotLE×talk 04:02, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Pete and Lulu, it seems to me that the ideas you are bringing up relate to mechanistic interaction between genes and environments rather than the statistical interactions. Perhaps this distinction could be clarified.  T0mpr1c3 (talk 09:42, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Tom, shouldn't mechanistic interaction automatically lead to statistical interaction? And isn't statistical interaction uninteresting in and of itself unless it indicates mechanistic interaction? After all, statistics should be just a tool to get to the underlying mechanisms. --Crusio (talk) 10:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, I agree in principle. But GxE can be defined either way and the entry probably needs to make that clear. T0mpr1c3 (talk) 06:47, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pre- and post-natal 

message: The concept of heritability really needs working in, somewhere in the first paragraph. Pete.Hurd 05:13, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heritability 

message: "Heritable phenotypic variation among individuals of a single genotype, elicited by variation in environmental conditions" (Keller, EF, and Lloyd, EA (1992). Keywords in Evolutionary Biology, p.256.) I tried to paraphrase, evidently not to everybody's satisfaction. Also I think we probably need some further discussion of how reaction norms relate to the concept of GxE, maybe along the lines of http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/heredity/ Any offers? T0mpr1c3 (talk) 10:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, evidently NoR is broader than GxE, because even in the absence of the latter, you can study the NoR (it will just be the same over all environments). I am not sure that the definition of Keller and Lloyd is correct, I always thought that NoR was the distribution of phenotypes that a particular genotype would give over different environments (meaning, including the variation within one genotype and one environment). I may be wrong about this, though. When I get back to the lab, I'll look this up in some older genetics textbooks, which generally are better for checking definitions (given the unfortunate drift of the meaaning of many definitions nowadays). --Crusio (talk) 10:22, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Norm of Reaction 

message: I have moved this edit from the article to here:
:There is still much discussion about how genes and the environment interact to influence complex behavioral traits and susceptibility to diseases. These issues were recently debated at Genes & Environment 2010.
The text is not sufficiently helpful to be warranted, and certainly should not be in the WP:LEAD (because that is a summary of the article). Further, we do not embed external links in articles; instead, links which satisfy WP:EL should be in an "External links" section. Ideally, someone would find some useful information from the site and use it as a reference for material added to the article. Johnuniq (talk) 03:39, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edit to lead 

message: You may find it helpful while reading or editing articles to look at a bibliography of  Biology and Genetics Citations, posted for the use of all Wikipedians who have occasion to edit articles on human genetics and related issues. I happen to have circulating access to a huge academic research library system at a university with an active research program in these issues (and to other academic libraries in the same large metropolitan area) and have been researching these issues sporadically since 1989. You are welcome to use these citations for your own research. You can help other Wikipedians by  suggesting new sources through comments on that page. It will be extremely helpful for articles on human genetics to edit them according to the  Wikipedia standards for reliable sources for medicine-related articles, as it is important to get these issues as well verified as possible. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 20:17, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations list useful for updating this article and related articles 

message: I think it would be good to add some short info about this study's findings to the article and/or other relevant articles (like human height and brain size). It's currently featured in 2021 in science like so:
Scientists report that in the past – with little relevance to future evolution – lower temperatures were associated with larger Homo body sizes and that long-term variability in precipitation was correlated with brain size.
--Prototyperspective (talk) 14:59, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please update with: "Different environmental variables predict body and brain size evolution in Homo"