GRR is available at http://bioinformatics.well.ox.ac.uk/GRR.

Sequencing-based studies have identified novel risk genes associated with severe epilepsies and revealed an excess of rare deleterious variation in less-severe forms of epilepsy. To identify the shared and distinct ultra-rare genetic risk factors for different types of epilepsies, we performed a whole-exome sequencing (WES) analysis of 9,170 epilepsy-affected individuals and 8,436 controls of European ancestry. We focused on three phenotypic groups: severe developmental and epileptic encephalopathies (DEEs), genetic generalized epilepsy (GGE), and non-acquired focal epilepsy (NAFE). We observed that compared to controls, individuals with any type of epilepsy carried an excess of ultra-rare, deleterious variants in constrained genes and in genes previously associated with epilepsy; we saw the strongest enrichment in individuals with DEEs and the least strong in individuals with NAFE. Moreover, we found that inhibitory GABA A receptor genes were enriched for missense variants across all three classes of epilepsy, whereas no enrichment was seen in excitatory receptor genes. The larger gene groups for the GABAergic pathway or cation channels also showed a significant mutational burden in DEEs and GGE. Although no single gene surpassed exome-wide significance among individuals with GGE or NAFE, highly constrained genes and genes encoding ion channels were among the lead associations; such genes included CACNA1G, EEF1A2, and GABRG2 for GGE and LGI1, TRIM3, and GABRG2 for NAFE. Our study, the largest epilepsy WES study to date, confirms a convergence in the genetics of severe and less-severe epilepsies associated with ultra-rare coding variation, and it highlights a ubiquitous role for GABAergic inhibition in epilepsy etiology.

Cytogenic testing is routinely applied in most neurological centres for severe paediatric epilepsies. However, which characteristics of copy number variants (CNVs) confer most epilepsy risk and which epilepsy subtypes carry the most CNV burden, have not been explored on a genome-wide scale. Here, we present the largest CNV investigation in epilepsy to date with 10 712 European epilepsy cases and 6746 ancestry-matched controls. Patients with genetic generalized epilepsy, lesional focal epilepsy, non-acquired focal epilepsy, and developmental and epileptic encephalopathy were included. All samples were processed with the same technology and analysis pipeline. All investigated epilepsy types, including lesional focal epilepsy patients, showed an increase in CNV burden in at least one tested category compared to controls. However, we observed striking differences in CNV burden across epilepsy types and investigated CNV categories. Genetic generalized epilepsy patients have the highest CNV burden in all categories tested, followed by developmental and epileptic encephalopathy patients. Both epilepsy types also show association for deletions covering genes intolerant for truncating variants. Genome-wide CNV breakpoint association showed not only significant loci for genetic generalized and developmental and epileptic encephalopathy patients but also for lesional focal epilepsy patients. With a 34-fold risk for developing genetic generalized epilepsy, we show for the first time that the established epilepsy-associated 15q13.3 deletion represents the strongest risk CNV for genetic generalized epilepsy across the whole genome. Using the human interactome, we examined the largest connected component of the genes overlapped by CNVs in the four epilepsy types. We observed that genetic generalized epilepsy and non-acquired focal epilepsy formed disease modules. In summary, we show that in all common epilepsy types, 1.5–3% of patients carry epilepsy-associated CNVs. The characteristics of risk CNVs vary tremendously across and within epilepsy types. Thus, we advocate genome-wide genomic testing to identify all disease-associated types of CNVs.

e know more about the etiology of individual differences in cog-W nitive abilities than just about any other psychological domain. (1981) noted over 140 studies of this domain, which yielded the largely consistent result that genetic differences account for approximately 50% of the observed variability in general cognitive ability. However, until fairly recently, the genetic and environmental models used by psychologists have done little more than partition variation in individual differences into two major components-the effects of nature and the effects of nurture, with each represented by a single parameter, h2 and e2, respectively. How could one hope, with just two parmeters, to Bouchard and McGueThe prepamtion of this chapter was supported, in part, by National Institute of Child Health and