I've heard of the "chopstick gene" fallacy - wrongly assuming an association between genetics and some characteristic, confounded by non-genetic factors.
Has this fallacy happened in real life?
I'm not really interested in cases deliberately focusing on race, where people have argued that there's an innate difference between people of different races based on certain genetic differences, such as the putative "warrior gene" ("warrior allele"?) being described as more common in Maori people. As far as I can tell, the "chopstick gene" isn't about arguing that Asian people are better with chopsticks because of genetic differences between Asians and non-Asians.
I'm more interested in research that was done in good faith, which ignored the possibility of genetic variations having different frequencies in different groups, that produced erroneous conclusions.