A Genomewide Linkage Scan for Abdominal Subcutaneous and Visceral Fat in Black and White Families
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abdominal visceral fat (AVF), abdominal subcutaneous fat (ASF), and abdominal total fat (ATF) were measured using a computed tomography scan, both before (baseline) and after (post) a 20-week endurance exercise training protocol in the HERITAGE Family Study. Each of the baseline and response (post minus baseline) measures was adjusted for several covariates, including total fat mass, and responses to training were further adjusted for baseline levels. Multipoint variance components linkage analysis using a genomewide scan of 344 markers was conducted separately by race using race-specific allele frequencies. Several promising results (P < 0.0023) were obtained. For baseline AVF, the best evidence was on 2q22.1 and 2q33.2-q36.3 (including the IRS1 locus) in whites, with suggestive findings on 7q22.2-q31.3 (including the LEP locus) in blacks. Although several regions were indicated for baseline ASF, only 4q31.22-q32.2 and 11p15.4-p11.2 replicated the results of another study. For responses to training, promising results were limited to ASF and ATF primarily on 7q36.2 (including NOS3) in blacks, with suggestive regions (P < 0.01) on 1q21.2-q24.1 (S100A, ATP1A2, and ATP1B1), 10q25.2 (ADRA2A), and 11p15.5 (IGF2). In summary, the 4q and 11p regions have now been implicated in two independent studies for ASF; further research is warranted to identify the genes and mutations in these regions that are responsible for fat accumulation in the abdominal depot. Additional work in an independent sample is needed to verify the linkages for baseline AVF as well as the response measures.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".