The Evidence for Hereditary Factors Contributing to High Altitude Adaptation in Andean Natives: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Humans have occupied the high plateaus and mountain valleys of the Andes and the Himalayas for thousands of years. Although sea level natives can, and often do, travel in these rarefied reaches, there is little doubt that natives born and raised in the "thin" air are better equipped to deal with the reduced availability of oxygen at altitude. What fraction of the hypoxia defense response of high altitude native populations is due to developmental adaptations acquired during growth and what fraction is due to a genetic component reflecting the effects of selective transmission of beneficial genetic variants through hundreds of generations of antecedents is as yet unresolved. This paper summarizes some of the studies that have been undertaken to address this issue in Andean indigenous populations, primarily with respect to those adaptations thought to be involved in the uptake, distribution and utilization of oxygen in children and adults. Specifically, it focuses on changes in chest morphology, pulmonary function, metabolism and hematology. Space constraints preclude extending this review to the large body of literature concerning prenatal and maternal adaptations although this critical stage in development has likely been subject to significant selective pressures. It is apparent that both nature and nurture influence the acquisition of a high altitude phenotype in humans and while there is some evidence for genetic adaptation in Andean highlanders, it is evident that these characteristics are expressed in concert with substantial environment-dependent developmental adjustments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".