Revision summary
GWAS tests common SNPs across the genome for association with a trait or disease. It showed that many adult diseases are polygenic and pointed to biological pathways. Polygenic scores are research tools, not fate. Limits include European-ancestry bias, missing heritability, and misuse as race biology. Environment, foetal programming and inequality still explain a large share of health. GWAS belongs with genetic markers and with non-Mendelian inheritance.
Model answer
Introduction
A genome-wide association study, or GWAS, scans many common DNA markers across the genome to see which ones are statistically more frequent in people with a disease or trait than in people without it. It advanced medicine by finding many small genetic clues at once. It did not find one gene for ‘being ill’.
Body
What GWAS does
After the Human Genome Project and HapMap-style catalogues of SNPs, researchers could test hundreds of thousands of markers in large samples. Hits appear as peaks on a Manhattan plot. Wellcome Trust case–control studies and later consortia on height, schizophrenia, type 2 diabetes and autoimmune disease are the textbook wave. The method is an application of genetic markers at genomic scale.
GWAS is good at common variants of small effect. It is weaker at rare variants of large effect, which need sequencing families or other designs.
How understanding advanced
- Architecture of complex disease: Heart disease, diabetes and many psychiatric traits are polygenic, which matches non-Mendelian inheritance. Barker’s foetal environment still matters; GWAS adds a layer of inherited liability, not a replacement.
- Biology clues: Hits can point to pathways (lipid metabolism, immune signalling) even when each SNP does almost nothing alone.
- Pharmacogenomics and risk scores: Polygenic scores try to rank risk. They are research tools. They are not destiny, especially when diet, infection and inequality are strong.
- Infectious disease: Host-genetics GWAS, including work during COVID-19, asked why severity differs. That is biological anthropology in a hospital key: variation, not blame.
Genome India and other non-European projects exist because the first decade of GWAS over-sampled European ancestry.
Limits an anthropologist must name
- European bias: Predictions fail or weaken in other populations. This is a scientific and justice problem.
- Missing heritability: Even many hits leave much family resemblance unexplained. Environment, rare variants and gene–gene interaction remain.
- Race misuse: A GWAS hit is not a racial essence. Lewontin’s lesson still applies.
- Ethics: Consent, feedback of risk, and insurance fear. Tribal and small-community sampling repeats older extractive genetics unless governance is real.
GWAS advanced understanding by mapping the polygenic landscape of common disease. It did not close the biocultural file.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD GW[GWAS] --> SNP[Many SNPs] SNP --> CD[Complex disease map] CD --> L1[Small effects] CD --> L2[European sample bias] CD --> E[Environment still matters]
Conclusion
GWAS showed that many common illnesses are influenced by many small DNA differences and pointed to biological pathways. The anthropological discussion is population bias, small effects, and the continuing force of environment and inequality. It is a powerful marker method, not a new racial science.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Examine the utility of human remains in forensic analysis. Discuss the facial reconstruction technique
Next question in the 2025 paper (Q8). View answer →
-
Did GWAS find the gene for diabetes?
No. It found many loci of small effect and some pathways. Diet, weight, womb constraint and inequality remain central.
-
Why does European sample bias matter in India?
Scores and hits trained on European samples transfer poorly. That is both a method limit and a justice issue for Indian populations.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2024 · Q4(c) · Anthropology GS 1 · 15 marks
What is genetic counseling? Briefly discuss various steps involved in it. -
2022 · Q1(d) · Anthropology GS 1 · 10 marks
Pedigree analysis in genetic counselling
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2025 · Anthropology GS 1 · 10 marks
Mendelian and non-Mendelian traits.
Mendelian genetics in man-family study, single factor, multifactor, lethal, sub-lethal and polygenic inheritance in man.
Mendelian traits follow one-locus segregation and can be read in a pedigree. ABO, PTC tasting, albinism, haemophilia A and Huntington disease are standard examples. Multiple alleles and sex-linkage extend Mendelism; they do not cancel it. Non-Mendelian traits include polygenic stature and skin colour, linkage, maternal mtDNA and imprinting. Environment plus many genes gives a curve, not a 3:1 ratio. Use family study for Mendelian markers and quantitative genetics for everyday variation. Single-factor, multifactor, lethal and polygenic inheritance is this same distinction.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2025 · Anthropology GS 1 · 10 marks
Theoretical significance of Purum kinship-system.
Kinship
The Purum are a Kuki-Chin group used by Needham as a test case for alliance theory. The claim was prescriptive marriage to mother’s brother’s daughter, with wife-givers and wife-takers in a cycle. Needham argued against Homans and Schneider: the pattern is structure, not sentiment. The case mattered because it took elementary structures beyond Australia and clarified prescription versus preference. Ackerman and others showed that the tables did not seal the cycle as neatly as the model. The lasting names are Lévi-Strauss, Needham and the model–practice gap.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2025 · Anthropology GS 1 · 10 marks
Osteodontokeratik culture and its makers.
Paleolithic
Osteodontokeratic means a supposed bone–tooth–horn culture named by Raymond Dart at Makapansgat. The claimed makers were Australopithecus prometheus, now placed in Australopithecus africanus. Dart read clubs, saws and daggers from antelope parts, and inferred hunting and violence. C. K. Brain showed that leopards, hyenas and cave processes explain much of the assemblage. The idea survives as a taphonomy lesson, not as a real industry. Osteodontokeratic is defined by site, claimed maker, and the later critique.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.