Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common illness accompanied by considerable morbidity, mortality, costs, and heightened risk of suicide. We conducted a genome-wide association (GWA) meta-analysis based in 135,458 cases and 344,901 control, We identified 44 independent and significant loci. The genetic findings were associated with clinical features of major depression, and implicated brain regions exhibiting anatomical differences in cases. Targets of antidepressant medications and genes involved in gene splicing were enriched for smaller association signal. We found important relations of genetic risk for major depression with educational attainment, body mass, and schizophrenia: lower educational attainment and higher body mass were putatively causal whereas major depression and schizophrenia reflected a partly shared biological etiology. All humans carry lesser or greater numbers of genetic risk factors for major depression. These findings help refine and define the basis of major depression and imply a continuous measure of risk underlies the clinical phenotype.

Fat tissue is the most important energy depot in vertebrates. The release of free fatty acids (FFAs) from stored fat requires the enzymatic activity of lipases. We showed that genetic inactivation of adipose triglyceride lipase (ATGL) in mice increases adipose mass and leads to triacylglycerol deposition in multiple tissues. ATGL-deficient mice accumulated large amounts of lipid in the heart, causing cardiac dysfunction and premature death. Defective cold adaptation indicated that the enzyme provides FFAs to fuel thermogenesis. The reduced availability of ATGL-derived FFAs leads to increased glucose use, increased glucose tolerance, and increased insulin sensitivity. These results indicate that ATGL is rate limiting in the catabolism of cellular fat depots and plays an important role in energy homeostasis.

Health risk factors such as body mass index (BMI) and serum cholesterol are associated with many common diseases. It often remains unclear whether the risk factors are cause or consequence of disease, or whether the associations are the result of confounding. We develop and apply a method (called GSMR) that performs a multi-SNP Mendelian randomization analysis using summary-level data from genome-wide association studies to test the causal associations of BMI, waist-to-hip ratio, serum cholesterols, blood pressures, height, and years of schooling (EduYears) with common diseases (sample sizes of up to 405,072). We identify a number of causal associations including a protective effect of LDL-cholesterol against type-2 diabetes (T2D) that might explain the side effects of statins on T2D, a protective effect of EduYears against Alzheimer’s disease, and bidirectional associations with opposite effects (e.g., higher BMI increases the risk of T2D but the effect of T2D on BMI is negative).

Genetic predictions of height differ among human populations and these differences have been interpreted as evidence of polygenic adaptation. These differences were first detected using SNPs genome-wide significantly associated with height, and shown to grow stronger when large numbers of sub-significant SNPs were included, leading to excitement about the prospect of analyzing large fractions of the genome to detect polygenic adaptation for multiple traits. Previous studies of height have been based on SNP effect size measurements in the GIANT Consortium meta-analysis. Here we repeat the analyses in the UK Biobank, a much more homogeneously designed study. We show that polygenic adaptation signals based on large numbers of SNPs below genome-wide significance are extremely sensitive to biases due to uncorrected population stratification. More generally, our results imply that typical constructions of polygenic scores are sensitive to population stratification and that population-level differences should be interpreted with caution.Editorial note: This article has been through an editorial process in which the authors decide how to respond to the issues raised during peer review. The Reviewing Editor's assessment is that all the issues have been addressed (<xref ref-type="decision-letter" rid="SA1">see decision letter</xref>).