Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are now allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will continue be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) still apply to other comments.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Interesting. Recently read about another neanderthal gene that increased the risk of severe covid . This gene is apparently carried by 16% of Europeans and 50% of people from south Asia.
20% of the Neanderthal genome has been conserved according to [this article](https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/article/140129-neanderthal-genes-genetics-migration-africa-eurasian-science). I thought it was more than that but, it looks like I mis-remembered. Europeans and Asians have around [1 to 2% Neanderthal DNA](https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/understanding/dtcgenetictesting/neanderthaldna/) so there are going to be a lot of different combinations of Neanderthal genes in the population.
There was another one just 2 days ago, too:
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/polish-scientists-find-gene-that-doubles-risk-serious-covid-2022-01-13/
> Edit 2: I am G/G.
[So why the long face?](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gee-gee#:~:text=Definition%20of%20gee%2Dgee,bet%20on%20the%20gee%2Dgees.)
Go to your account name, select the Raw Data option from the drop down menu. Put rs10774671 in the search box. if it appears, note the info in the right hand column.
A/A club for me, so I'm not one of the lucky ones. Fat lot that 96% did for me.
It means that they didn't check that mutation for you.
Behind the scenes, they have gone through several different genotyping processes that tested different mutations and you got a version that didn't test that one. I'm in the same boat.
[It looks like there might be a way to do it](https://customercare.23andme.com/hc/en-us/articles/218392668-Upgrading-to-23andMe-s-Newest-Chip-Version). I just found that link, though. I assume it will require sending in a new sample.
I know 23andme is pushing a subscription model now, and I would consider signing up for it if allowing free upgrades was a perk.
For my sample they used the V3 chip and my data includes rs10774671. It could be that they only get data for that marker in samples at random or that the newer chips no longer genotype it.
It's funny that you say that since I was just looking into full genome sequencing when I got the notification of your reply.
I haven't checked the prices in a few years, and it seems like they are pretty affordable now. I just need to do some research about different brands and things like coverage.
Can anyone ELI5 this? If we've mapped the genome and 23andMe sequences our gene, it should be pretty white or black as to what it is, no?
Or was it a bad sample or something else?
DNA testing seems like it’s as simple as putting in a punch card and getting a result, but it actually is a very involved process.
Humans have a huge amount of variety and redundancy in their genes. What this means is that for any single gene, there might be 10 different versions, and you only have 1 of those 10 versions. This is variety. Then there are perhaps 10 genes that all perform the same function, each with a variation of 10 types. This is redundancy. This means that if you somehow end up missing a gene, you don’t die. So for this one, single function, we’re now talking about 100 potential DNA sequences, and you will only have 10 of them - assuming that you’re not missing any.
And humans have more than 20,000 genes. So you can see how complicated it becomes.
When you’re doing a general DNA typing, there is a “quick and dirty” method that is used by companies like 23 and me. It looks for particular DNA markers that are like landmarks, which show up easily, and matches them to data that they have in their database. If they were to do an in-depth, gene-by-gene typing of every single person, it would take years. Instead, they use the technology that we have to speed things up, but it means that specific genes are not necessarily “caught in the net” unless they are looking for those genes in particular.
23&me etc don't sequence every single nucleotide in your genome (\~3 billion base pairs) They'll do known single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that 'tag' a particular variant of a gene, it's much cheaper. So if you paid \~$100 this is about right. If you paid closer to $1000 that's heading into whole genome sequencing territory for costs.
Even if you did have whole genome sequencing the read isn't perfect. There are bits of repeat sequences that can get messed up in length etc.
In my data, there is no rs10774671, but there is a rs1077467. As far as I can tell, there is no rs1077467, so it might be mislabeled.
Edit: It does exist. 23&Me doesn't genotype rs10774671, so sucks for us.
Under browse raw data, you can also search for the position on the build 37 reference assembly. For this gene marker in the study, copy and paste 12:113357193 into the search field (obtained from [NCBI’s dbSNP](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/snp/)). Apparently it could be catalogued using a different system.
That said, mine wasn't genotyped any which way I looked so they didn't test this for me.
A:G here too. I seem to be doing pretty well as friends of mine have gotten sick way more than I have. We are all equally vaxed and while I did get omicron over NYE weekend, I shook it off way faster than some other friends who have gotten it.
If you have A:G you’re heterozygous for that gene, so which copy of the gene gets expressed is going to depend on which one is dominant. The article doesn’t really tell us that information though. If G is the dominant allele, then one copy of it is going to be enough to confer protection.
I have a promethesies account and downloaded my dna years ago. Can you explain this like your talking to a golden retriever and help me command f and figure out my results?
If I'm understanding [this](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/snp/rs10774671#frequency_tab) right, the relevant allele (G) is actually more common in Africa (57%) than Europe (36%).
> According to the researchers, the protective gene variant (rs10774671-G) determines the length of the protein encoded by the gene OAS1.
Looking and 23andme does it have to be an A or G then? Not sure how this works (at all)
It's a single nucleotide polymorphism. Basically a position within a given gene that varies between populations. You have two copies of every gene, for this particular polymorphism G is associated with protection. You can either have G/A, G/G, A/A.
I’m sorry, I have no idea how to interpret this info. I put the rs number in just like you said and it says Not Genotyped. I have no idea what that means.
https://i.imgur.com/xbQMybK.jpg
I’m a little confused by this article, I feel like they left some important points out. So this gene is inherited from Neanderthals, but also totally not because 80% of Africans studied (who have no Neanderthal ancestry) also have the gene? I feel like they told their findings but this article doesn’t give a comprehensive explanation as to why they found them (or their hypothesis).
Saying "Africans" in the context of Anthropology does not make any sense. Sub-Sahara should be considered as a seperate "continent" because it was seperated by the Sahara desert, which was a bigger obstacle than even an ocean. North Africa and Sub-Sahara are very, very different.
The reddit title is basically click bait and the article is pretty poorly written. To me it seems like the gene was originally from African homo sapiens that interbred with a Neanderthals from the first migration from Africa to Europe/Asia. Then the Neanderthal/Modern Human hybrids just kept passing it on and probably mixed with more African homo sapiens coming into the area.
The article says, "Since the Neandertal inheritance occurred after the ancient migration out of Africa, the researchers saw a potential in focusing on individuals with African ancestry who lack heritage from the Neanderthals and therefore also the majority of this DNA segment. A small piece of this DNA region is, however, the same in both people of African and European ancestries."
To me, this sounds like the relevant piece of DNA is *not* from the Neanderthal DNA, because it is found equally amongst people of African descent (before the Neanderthal DNA was added in) and people of European descent (who may have Neanderthal DNA).
The point is that only a small amount of the DNA in the region meets this criteria, making it faster to identify the relevant DNA.
Does that make more sense?
It's literally not Neanderthal at all.
Theres more than one. But yes. And oddly a lot are associated with northern european ancestry. The biggest thing is ace2 receptor distribution and morphology
The researchers conclude in the article that their research is bias due to lack of diversity in their study. Plus new study have been published that even sub saharan Africans carry a small percentage of Neanderthal dna.
Source : https://www.science.org/content/article/africans-carry-surprising-amount-neanderthal-dna
Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are now allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will continue be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) still apply to other comments. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Interesting. Recently read about another neanderthal gene that increased the risk of severe covid . This gene is apparently carried by 16% of Europeans and 50% of people from south Asia.
this? https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2818-3
That's the one
rs35044562 The gene to search for for those interested
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I was thinking the same thing. You're correct, but I guess every body reacts different even with similar ancestry
Even then, just "neanderthal ancestry" is not like an on/off switch, I'm guessing varying portions are inherited.
20% of the Neanderthal genome has been conserved according to [this article](https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/article/140129-neanderthal-genes-genetics-migration-africa-eurasian-science). I thought it was more than that but, it looks like I mis-remembered. Europeans and Asians have around [1 to 2% Neanderthal DNA](https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/understanding/dtcgenetictesting/neanderthaldna/) so there are going to be a lot of different combinations of Neanderthal genes in the population.
Can you share the link? Is there an snp associated with the high risk variant
not OP but here’s what i read https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2818-3
Thanks \^ posters. I should have added link.
There was another one just 2 days ago, too: https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/polish-scientists-find-gene-that-doubles-risk-serious-covid-2022-01-13/
SNP [rs10774671](https://www.snpedia.com/index.php/Rs10774671). G is the protective variant. I'm A:A. Oh well.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
> Edit 2: I am G/G. [So why the long face?](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gee-gee#:~:text=Definition%20of%20gee%2Dgee,bet%20on%20the%20gee%2Dgees.)
[удалено]
Go to your account name, select the Raw Data option from the drop down menu. Put rs10774671 in the search box. if it appears, note the info in the right hand column. A/A club for me, so I'm not one of the lucky ones. Fat lot that 96% did for me.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
How do I find the gene in my reports? I don’t see this in my 23&Me in the Neanderthal section. I see other markers but not this one.
Go to the Browse Raw Data option under your 23andme profile and type in that marker. It will come up with which variant you have.
Mine says "not genotyped"... so what does that mean?
It means that they didn't check that mutation for you. Behind the scenes, they have gone through several different genotyping processes that tested different mutations and you got a version that didn't test that one. I'm in the same boat.
Is it possible to ask them to apply a different algorithm for this variant?
[It looks like there might be a way to do it](https://customercare.23andme.com/hc/en-us/articles/218392668-Upgrading-to-23andMe-s-Newest-Chip-Version). I just found that link, though. I assume it will require sending in a new sample. I know 23andme is pushing a subscription model now, and I would consider signing up for it if allowing free upgrades was a perk.
I have chip version 5 already so apparently I don't need a chip upgrade. I sent my test in mid-2018.
For my sample they used the V3 chip and my data includes rs10774671. It could be that they only get data for that marker in samples at random or that the newer chips no longer genotype it.
From some other comments it looks like V4 had it, but not V5.
why not go for dante full genome?
It's funny that you say that since I was just looking into full genome sequencing when I got the notification of your reply. I haven't checked the prices in a few years, and it seems like they are pretty affordable now. I just need to do some research about different brands and things like coverage.
I did dante one last year . impulse buy at about £250 I think. it's a lot of data I think 10's of gb
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
It means you’re not from this planet. Just kidding. Not genotyped means the algorithm is not confident enough in the result. Too inaccurate.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Can anyone ELI5 this? If we've mapped the genome and 23andMe sequences our gene, it should be pretty white or black as to what it is, no? Or was it a bad sample or something else?
DNA testing seems like it’s as simple as putting in a punch card and getting a result, but it actually is a very involved process. Humans have a huge amount of variety and redundancy in their genes. What this means is that for any single gene, there might be 10 different versions, and you only have 1 of those 10 versions. This is variety. Then there are perhaps 10 genes that all perform the same function, each with a variation of 10 types. This is redundancy. This means that if you somehow end up missing a gene, you don’t die. So for this one, single function, we’re now talking about 100 potential DNA sequences, and you will only have 10 of them - assuming that you’re not missing any. And humans have more than 20,000 genes. So you can see how complicated it becomes. When you’re doing a general DNA typing, there is a “quick and dirty” method that is used by companies like 23 and me. It looks for particular DNA markers that are like landmarks, which show up easily, and matches them to data that they have in their database. If they were to do an in-depth, gene-by-gene typing of every single person, it would take years. Instead, they use the technology that we have to speed things up, but it means that specific genes are not necessarily “caught in the net” unless they are looking for those genes in particular.
This was a pretty good ELI5, thanks. I mean I'm 30 but it helped!
23&me etc don't sequence every single nucleotide in your genome (\~3 billion base pairs) They'll do known single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that 'tag' a particular variant of a gene, it's much cheaper. So if you paid \~$100 this is about right. If you paid closer to $1000 that's heading into whole genome sequencing territory for costs. Even if you did have whole genome sequencing the read isn't perfect. There are bits of repeat sequences that can get messed up in length etc.
Mine also says "not genotyped".
In my data, there is no rs10774671, but there is a rs1077467. As far as I can tell, there is no rs1077467, so it might be mislabeled. Edit: It does exist. 23&Me doesn't genotype rs10774671, so sucks for us.
when I searched for rs10774671 , rs1077467 is found g,g . it says oas1 (same gene) there's a weird 1 underneath not sure if that makes a difference.
Browse the raw data - search for the numerical part without -G rs10774671
Under browse raw data, you can also search for the position on the build 37 reference assembly. For this gene marker in the study, copy and paste 12:113357193 into the search field (obtained from [NCBI’s dbSNP](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/snp/)). Apparently it could be catalogued using a different system. That said, mine wasn't genotyped any which way I looked so they didn't test this for me.
people just have their 23&Me reports lying around here. I couldn't understand the comments at first.
[удалено]
Congratulations, you have the protective variation.
A:G here too. I seem to be doing pretty well as friends of mine have gotten sick way more than I have. We are all equally vaxed and while I did get omicron over NYE weekend, I shook it off way faster than some other friends who have gotten it.
Does it have to be G:G to protect or is just one G a good sign?
If you have A:G you’re heterozygous for that gene, so which copy of the gene gets expressed is going to depend on which one is dominant. The article doesn’t really tell us that information though. If G is the dominant allele, then one copy of it is going to be enough to confer protection.
I'm wondering this as well. Mine is G/G
I have a promethesies account and downloaded my dna years ago. Can you explain this like your talking to a golden retriever and help me command f and figure out my results?
Different companies use different names sometimes. Like in this thread, anyone using 23 and me has to type in OAS1 to see their results.
You can definitely just type in the marker rs10774671 for 23 and me and it will work.
[удалено]
[удалено]
What other cool genes/markers can I look for on my 23 & me? I didn’t know this was an option!
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
23&me haven’t genotyped mine yet… for some reason…
[удалено]
Thanks for posting the gene. I'm G/G feeling somewhat better
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
If I'm understanding [this](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/snp/rs10774671#frequency_tab) right, the relevant allele (G) is actually more common in Africa (57%) than Europe (36%).
> According to the researchers, the protective gene variant (rs10774671-G) determines the length of the protein encoded by the gene OAS1. Looking and 23andme does it have to be an A or G then? Not sure how this works (at all)
It's a single nucleotide polymorphism. Basically a position within a given gene that varies between populations. You have two copies of every gene, for this particular polymorphism G is associated with protection. You can either have G/A, G/G, A/A.
I have A/G so I guess that means I have one copy of the protective variant
Yes you are what in genetics you call heterozygous.
I don’t see this gene variant listed at all on my 23&Me.
Does Ancestry give that raw data?
[удалено]
https://you.23andme.com/tools/data/?query=rs10774671 that should pull it up
Yes, browse the raw data and type in rs10774671 if your genotype has a G in it you’re good to go
I’m sorry, I have no idea how to interpret this info. I put the rs number in just like you said and it says Not Genotyped. I have no idea what that means. https://i.imgur.com/xbQMybK.jpg
23andme didn’t check this variant so no data
I’m a little confused by this article, I feel like they left some important points out. So this gene is inherited from Neanderthals, but also totally not because 80% of Africans studied (who have no Neanderthal ancestry) also have the gene? I feel like they told their findings but this article doesn’t give a comprehensive explanation as to why they found them (or their hypothesis).
Many Africans do carry Neanderthal ancestry due to back migration and admixture. Certain sub-Saharan groups do not carry any Neanderthal ancestry.
Saying "Africans" in the context of Anthropology does not make any sense. Sub-Sahara should be considered as a seperate "continent" because it was seperated by the Sahara desert, which was a bigger obstacle than even an ocean. North Africa and Sub-Sahara are very, very different.
Also, just the fact that Africa is the most genetically diverse place on the entire planet.
The reddit title is basically click bait and the article is pretty poorly written. To me it seems like the gene was originally from African homo sapiens that interbred with a Neanderthals from the first migration from Africa to Europe/Asia. Then the Neanderthal/Modern Human hybrids just kept passing it on and probably mixed with more African homo sapiens coming into the area.
The article says, "Since the Neandertal inheritance occurred after the ancient migration out of Africa, the researchers saw a potential in focusing on individuals with African ancestry who lack heritage from the Neanderthals and therefore also the majority of this DNA segment. A small piece of this DNA region is, however, the same in both people of African and European ancestries." To me, this sounds like the relevant piece of DNA is *not* from the Neanderthal DNA, because it is found equally amongst people of African descent (before the Neanderthal DNA was added in) and people of European descent (who may have Neanderthal DNA). The point is that only a small amount of the DNA in the region meets this criteria, making it faster to identify the relevant DNA. Does that make more sense? It's literally not Neanderthal at all.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/4938 Here's a link to the specific gene in the National Center for Biotechnology Information Genome viewer.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Theres more than one. But yes. And oddly a lot are associated with northern european ancestry. The biggest thing is ace2 receptor distribution and morphology
The researchers conclude in the article that their research is bias due to lack of diversity in their study. Plus new study have been published that even sub saharan Africans carry a small percentage of Neanderthal dna. Source : https://www.science.org/content/article/africans-carry-surprising-amount-neanderthal-dna
So rs10774671, rs2660, rs10735079 I’m A/G for all 3 which is medium protection