if a gene can predict differences between siblings, you can be quite confident that it is in fact CAUSING the difference.
This isn’t quite correct, but the conclusion is still the same. What it actually means is that the variant is causal or is tightly linked to (i.e., close to and co-inherited with) the causal variant.
For selection purposes, this information is sufficient. However if you wanted to perform editing to affect the phenotype, you would need to actually confirm causality.
Fair point. What I was really trying to say is that in the context of embryo selection, you can be pretty confident that selecting embryos based on that predictor will actually result in more or less of the trait depending on what you’re selecting for.
But you’re right. I’ve edited the post to clarify that.
This isn’t quite correct, but the conclusion is still the same. What it actually means is that the variant is causal or is tightly linked to (i.e., close to and co-inherited with) the causal variant.
For selection purposes, this information is sufficient. However if you wanted to perform editing to affect the phenotype, you would need to actually confirm causality.
The other information in this post is correct.
Fair point. What I was really trying to say is that in the context of embryo selection, you can be pretty confident that selecting embryos based on that predictor will actually result in more or less of the trait depending on what you’re selecting for.
But you’re right. I’ve edited the post to clarify that.