SummaryEducational attainment (EA) is strongly influenced by social and other environmental factors, but genetic factors are also estimated to account for at least 20% of the variation across individuals1. We report the results of a genome-wide association study (GWAS) for EA that extends our earlier discovery sample1,2 of 101,069 individuals to 293,723 individuals, and a replication in an independent sample of 111,349 individuals from the UK Biobank. We now identify 74 genome-wide significant loci associated with number of years of schooling completed. Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with educational attainment are disproportionately found in genomic regions regulating gene expression in the fetal brain. Candidate genes are preferentially expressed in neural tissue, especially during the prenatal period, and enriched for biological pathways involved in neural development. Our findings demonstrate that, even for a behavioral phenotype that is mostly environmentally determined, a well-powered GWAS identifies replicable associated genetic variants that suggest biologically relevant pathways. Because EA is measured in large numbers of individuals, it will continue to be useful as a proxy phenotype in efforts to characterize the genetic influences of related phenotypes, including cognition and neuropsychiatric disease.

We conduct a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of educational attainment (EA) in a sample of ~3 million individuals and identify 3,952 approximately uncorrelated genome-wide-significant single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). A genome-wide polygenic predictor, or polygenic index (PGI), explains 12–16% of EA variance and contributes to risk prediction for ten diseases. Direct effects (i.e., controlling for parental PGIs) explain roughly half the PGI’s magnitude of association with EA and other phenotypes. The correlation between mate-pair PGIs is far too large to be consistent with phenotypic assortment alone, implying additional assortment on PGI-associated factors. In an additional GWAS of dominance deviations from the additive model, we identify no genome-wide-significant SNPs, and a separate X-chromosome additive GWAS identifies 57.

Homozygosity has long been associated with rare, often devastating, Mendelian disorders1 and Darwin was one of the first to recognise that inbreeding reduces evolutionary fitness2. However, the effect of the more distant parental relatedness common in modern human populations is less well understood. Genomic data now allow us to investigate the effects of homozygosity on traits of public health importance by observing contiguous homozygous segments (runs of homozygosity, ROH), which are inferred to be homozygous along their complete length. Given the low levels of genome-wide homozygosity prevalent in most human populations, information is required on very large numbers of people to provide sufficient power3,4. Here we use ROH to study 16 health-related quantitative traits in 354,224 individuals from 102 cohorts and find statistically significant associations between summed runs of homozygosity (SROH) and four complex traits: height, forced expiratory lung volume in 1 second (FEV1), general cognitive ability (g) and educational attainment (nominal p<1 × 10−300, 2.1 × 10−6, 2.5 × 10−10, 1.8 × 10−10). In each case increased homozygosity was associated with decreased trait value, equivalent to the offspring of first cousins being 1.2 cm shorter and having 10 months less education. Similar effect sizes were found across four continental groups and populations with different degrees of genome-wide homozygosity, providing convincing evidence for the first time that homozygosity, rather than confounding, directly contributes to phenotypic variance. Contrary to earlier reports in substantially smaller samples5,6, no evidence was seen of an influence of genome-wide homozygosity on blood pressure and low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, or ten other cardio-metabolic traits. Since directional dominance is predicted for traits under directional evolutionary selection7, this study provides evidence that increased stature and cognitive function have been positively selected in human evolution, whereas many important risk factors for late-onset complex diseases may not have been.

In many species, the offspring of related parents suffer reduced reproductive success, a phenomenon known as inbreeding depression. In humans, the importance of this effect has remained unclear, partly because reproduction between close relatives is both rare and frequently associated with confounding social factors. Here, using genomic inbreeding coefficients (FROH) for >1.4 million individuals, we show that FROH is significantly associated (p < 0.0005) with apparently deleterious changes in 32 out of 100 traits analysed. These changes are associated with runs of homozygosity (ROH), but not with common variant homozygosity, suggesting that genetic variants associated with inbreeding depression are predominantly rare. The effect on fertility is striking: FROH equivalent to the offspring of first cousins is associated with a 55% decrease [95% CI 44–66%] in the odds of having children. Finally, the effects of FROH are confirmed within full-sibling pairs, where the variation in FROH is independent of all environmental confounding.

In the sentence beginning 'The meQTL are enriched for functionally relevant characteristics', please provide a de inition for Hi-C.2. In the author list, there are two authors with the name Panos Deloukas with different af iliations. Please con irm whether this is the same individual and whether the two authors can be merged. 3.Please check your article carefully, coordinate with any co-authors and enter all inal edits clearly in the eproof, remembering to save frequently. Once corrections are submitted, we cannot routinely make further changes to the article. 4. Note that the eproof should be amended in only one browser window at any one time; otherwise changes will be overwritten. 5. Author surnames have been highlighted. Please check these carefully and adjust if the irst name or surname is marked up incorrectly. Note that changes here will affect indexing of your article in public repositories such as PubMed. Also, carefully check the spelling and numbering of all author names and af iliations, and the corresponding email address(es).6. You cannot alter accepted Supplementary Information iles except for critical changes to scienti ic content. If you do resupply any iles, please also provide a brief (but complete) list of changes. If these are not considered scienti ic changes, any altered Supplementary iles will not be used, only the originally accepted version will be published. If applicable, please ensure that any accession codes and datasets whoseDOIs or other identi iers are mentioned in the paper are scheduled for public release as soon as possible, we recommend within a few days of submitting your proof, and update the database record with publication details from this article once available. 8. Your paper has been copy edited. Please review every sentence to ensure that it conveys your intended meaning; if changes are required, please provide further clari ication rather than reverting to the original text. Please note that formatting (including hyphenation, Latin words,and any reference citations that might be mistaken for exponents) has been made consistent with our house style. 9. Please con irm or correct the city name inserted in af iliations 5, 10, 12, 13, 21, 22, 39 and 44. 10. In the sentence beginning 'Our meQTL replicate in data generated by the Illumina', please provide a de inition for EPIC and con irm whether the de inition provided for MeDIP-seq is correct. 11. In the legend for Fig. 2g, please provide a de inition for SAT. 12. In the sentence beginning 'We used summary data-based Mendelian', please con irm whether it is correct to say '0.05 ÷ n tests'. 13. In the sentence beginning 'We then tested the 4,811 eQTL genes', please provide a de inition for coloc PP4. 14. Please note, we reserve ‘signi icant' and its derivatives for statistical signi icance. This has been reworded where this was not the intended meaning (for example to important, notable, ...