Variation in <i>ALDH4A1</i> , Proline Intake and Plasma Proteins in a Population of Young Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The effects of dietary proline content on the lifespan of Caenorhabditis elegans have recently been shown to differ between wild‐type strains and those with a mutation in alh‐6 , a gene involved in proline metabolism. However, this association has not been examined in humans. Objective The objective was to determine whether there is an interaction between dietary proline intake and common genetic variations in the ALDH4A1 gene, the human ortholog of alh‐6 , on proteomic biomarkers in humans. Methods Subjects were Caucasian participants of the Toronto Nutrigenomics and Health Study (n=488), a cross sectional examination of young adults aged 20–29 years. Dietary proline intake was estimated using a 196‐item semi‐quantitative food frequency questionnaire. A panel of 54 plasma proteins that become dys regulated during the progression of many chronic conditions were measured using a multiple reaction monitoring HPLC‐MS/MS assay. Two single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the ALDH4A1 gene (rs9117 and rs4912075) were genotyped and the association between these SNPs and the plasma proteome was examined using general linear models (GLMs) adjusted for age, sex, BMI and hormonal contraceptive use among women. GLMs were then used to determine whether stratification by the median value of energy‐adjusted proline intake modified any observed associations. Results There was a significant interaction (p<0.05) between ALDH4A1 variant rs4917025 and proline intake on circulating levels of apolipoprotein I and histidine‐rich glycoprotein, as well as an interaction between rs9117 and proline intake on concentrations of apolipoprotein D, zinc‐α 2 ‐glycoprotein and serum amyloid P‐component (p<0.05). Conclusion These results indicate that genetic variation in ALDH4A1 may interact with dietary proline intake in humans to influence concentrations of various proteomics biomarkers of health. Support or Funding Information Research support from the Advanced Foods and Materials Network.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".