Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (13)
- Conference Proceeding (3)
- Part of Periodical (2)
- Preprint (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (19)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (19)
Keywords
- Household Finance (2)
- Investor Protection (2)
- Private Investment (2)
- Atomic and Molecular Physics (1)
- Collembola (1)
- Consumer financial protection (1)
- Diplura (1)
- ESTs (1)
- Ellipura (1)
- Entognatha (1)
- Financial advice (1)
- Genetics (1)
- Genome-wide association studies (1)
- Household finance (1)
- Individual investor (1)
- Inducements (1)
- Nonoculata (1)
- Protura (1)
- SARS-CoV-2 (1)
- Viral infection (1)
- conflicting hypotheses (1)
- likelihood quartet mapping (1)
- missing data (1)
- phylogenomics (1)
Institute
The genetic make-up of an individual contributes to the susceptibility and response to viral infection. Although environmental, clinical and social factors have a role in the chance of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and the severity of COVID-191,2, host genetics may also be important. Identifying host-specific genetic factors may reveal biological mechanisms of therapeutic relevance and clarify causal relationships of modifiable environmental risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection and outcomes. We formed a global network of researchers to investigate the role of human genetics in SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity. Here we describe the results of three genome-wide association meta-analyses that consist of up to 49,562 patients with COVID-19 from 46 studies across 19 countries. We report 13 genome-wide significant loci that are associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection or severe manifestations of COVID-19. Several of these loci correspond to previously documented associations to lung or autoimmune and inflammatory diseases3,4,5,6,7. They also represent potentially actionable mechanisms in response to infection. Mendelian randomization analyses support a causal role for smoking and body-mass index for severe COVID-19 although not for type II diabetes. The identification of novel host genetic factors associated with COVID-19 was made possible by the community of human genetics researchers coming together to prioritize the sharing of data, results, resources and analytical frameworks. This working model of international collaboration underscores what is possible for future genetic discoveries in emerging pandemics, or indeed for any complex human disease.
Die Fundmeldungen in Band 33 von Botanik und Naturschutz in Hessen stammen von: Dirk Bönsel, Martin de Jong, Wolfgang Ehmke, Peter Emrich, Benjamin Feller, Brunhilde Göbel, Thomas Gregor, Arthur Händler, Sylvain Hodvina, Gerwin Kasperek, Egbert Korte, Ute Lange, Stefan Meyer, Hasko Friedrich Nesemann, Uwe Raabe, Bernd Sauerwein, Marco Schmidt, Christof Nikolaus Schröder, Antje Schwab, Rainer Stoodt und Michael Uebeler.
Phylogenetic relationships of the primarily wingless insects are still considered unresolved. Even the most comprehensive phylogenomic studies that addressed this question did not yield congruent results. In order to get a grip on these problems, we here analyzed the sources of incongruence in these phylogenomic studies using an extended transcriptome dataset.Our analyses showed that unevenly distributed missing data can be severely misleading by inflating node support despite the absence of phylogenetic signal. In consequence, only decisive datasets should be used which exclusively comprise data blocks containing all taxa whose relationships are addressed. Additionally, we employed Four-cluster Likelihood-Mapping (FcLM) to measure the degree of congruence among genes of a dataset, as a measure of support alternative to bootstrap. FcLM showed incongruent signal among genes, which in our case is correlated with neither functional class assignment of these genes, nor with model misspecification due to unpartitioned analyses. The herein analyzed dataset is the currently largest dataset covering primarily wingless insects, but failed to elucidate their interordinal phylogenetic relationships. While this is unsatisfying from a phylogenetic perspective, we try to show that the analyses of structure and signal within phylogenomic data can protect us from biased phylogenetic inferences due to analytical artefacts.
RECENTLY, PASSIVE ETFS AND INDEX FUNDS HAVE BECOME POPULAR AMONG INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS. IN OUR STUDY, WE INVESTIGATE WHETHER INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS BENEFIT FROM USING THEM. WITH DATA FROM ONE OF THE LARGEST BROKERAGES IN GERMANY, WE FIND THAT INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS WORSEN THEIR PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE AFTER USING THESE PRODUCTS IN COMPARISON TO NON-USERS. SINCE THESE SECURITIES MAKE MARKET TIMING EASIER, FURTHER ANALYSIS REVEALS THAT THE DECREASE IN USERS’ PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE IS PRIMARILY DUE TO BAD MARKET TIMING.
THIS STUDY INVESTIGATES WHAT HAPPENS WHEN RETAIL CUSTOMERS ARE OFFERED FREE AND UNBIASED ADVICE. USING A LARGE FIELD EXPERIMENT IT SHOWS THAT THOSE WHO ACCEPT THE OFFER (5%) ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE MALE, OLDER, WEALTHIER, MORE EXPERIENCED AND MORE FINANCIALLY SOPHISTICATED. HOWEVER, EVEN THOUGH THE ADVICE WOULD HAVE HELPED, IT ACTUALLY LARGELY FAILED TO HELP BECAUSE THE CUSTOMERS DID NOT LISTEN TO IT. OVERALL, OUR RESULTS SUGGEST THAT THE MERE AVAILABILITY OF UNBIASED FINANCIAL ADVICE IS A NECESSARY BUT NOT SUFFICIENT CONDITION FOR BENEFITING RETAIL CUSTOMERS.
WE DECOMPOSE INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS’ PORTFOLIO RETURNS INTO PASSIVE BENCHMARK RETURNS, ACTIVE SECURITY SELECTION RETURNS, AND ACTIVE MARKET TIMING RETURNS. FOR THE AVERAGE INVESTOR IN OUR SAMPLE, PASSIVE BENCHMARK RETURNS EXPLAIN SOME 40% OF VARIATION IN LONGITUDINAL PORTFOLIO RETURNS, SECURITY SELECTION EXPLAINS AN ADDITIONAL 50%, AND MARKET TIMING PLAYS ONLY A MINOR ROLE. THIS STANDS IN STARK CONTRAST TO EARLIER RESULTS ON INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS WHERE PASSIVE BENCHMARK RETURNS (REFLECTING DIFFERENT ASSET ALLOCATION STRATEGIES) EXPLAIN OVER 90%. THE PREDOMINANCE OF SECURITY SELECTION COMES AT A COST FOR INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS: INVESTORS FROM THE HIGHEST QUINTILE IN TERMS OF SECURITY SELECTION ACTIVITY UNDERPERFORM THEIR PEERS FROM THE LOWEST QUINTILE BY MORE THAN 10 PERCENTAGE POINTS PER YEAR. TRANSACTION COSTS EXPLAIN ONLY PART OF THIS UNDERPERFORMANCE. THE LESS INVESTORS DIVERSIFY, THE WORSE THEY DO.