{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0379041248606466, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008918617614269788, 'mean_word_length': 5.456834532374101, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 2, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Mapping the cleft-lip genes: the first fix?

Ever since Poul Fogh-Andersen's (1942) monumental report on the inheritance of harelip and cleft palate provided enough numbers for serious statistical analysis, geneticists have been speculating on the inheritance of cleft lip, with or without cleft palate (CL(P)) and isolated cleft palate (CP). Indeed, Fogh-Andersen, in his review of literature, lists claims for just about every imaginable mode of inheritance, including dominance with reduced penetrance, partial dominance (with homozygotes being severely affected and heterozygotes mildly affected or normal), double or "polyhybrid" recessivity, partial sex linkage (plus an autosomal recessive gene), and -most imaginative of all -"polymeric" recessivity, with two factors for the upper lip (right and left), two for the hard palate, and one for the soft palate. Fogh-Andersen's interpretation of his own data was that CL(P) showed conditioned dominance with sex limitation to males, meaning that the gene usually expressed itself in the homozygote but occasionally in the heterozygote. He also made the important observation that CL(P) was, in most cases, genetically different from CP, a distinction for which the embryological basis was subsequently demonstrated in the mouse (Trasler and Fraser 1963). In the 1950s the idea was developed that cleft palate, induced by maternal treatment with cortisone in the mouse, was a multifactorial, threshold trait, and a biological basis was postulated for liability (the stage at which the palate shelves normally moved from vertical to horizontal, preliminary to fusion) and for a developmental threshold (the maximum amount of delay compatible with closure) (Fraser et al. 1957). Various factors involved in shelf movement to the horizontal and