Prenatal Mancozeb Exposure, Excess Manganese, and Neurodevelopment at 1 Year of Age in the Infants’ Environmental Health (ISA) Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although growing evidence suggests that early-life excess manganese (Mn) impairs neurodevelopment, data on the neurodevelopmental effects of mancozeb, a fungicide containing Mn, and its main metabolite ethylenethiourea (ETU) are limited. OBJECTIVE: We examined whether prenatal mancozeb exposure and excess Mn were associated with neurodevelopment in 355 1-y-old infants living near banana plantations with frequent aerial mancozeb spraying in Costa Rica. METHODS: We measured urinary ETU, hair Mn, and blood Mn concentrations in samples collected 1-3 times during pregnancy from mothers enrolled in the Infants' Environmental Health (ISA) study. We then assessed neurodevelopment in their 1-y-old infants using the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, 3rd edition (BSID-III). We estimated exposure-outcome associations using linear regression models adjusted for maternal education, parity, gestational age at birth, child age, Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment score, and location of neurodevelopmental assessment. RESULTS: Median (P25-P75) urinary ETU, hair Mn, and blood Mn measured during pregnancy were 3.3 μg/L (2.4-4.9; specific gravity-corrected), 1.7 μg/g (0.9-4.1), and 24.0 μg/L (20.3-28.0), respectively. Among girls, higher ETU was associated with lower social-emotional scores [β per 10-fold increase=-7.4 points (95% CI: -15.2, 0.4)], whereas higher hair Mn was associated with lower cognitive scores [-3.0 (-6.1, 0.1)]. Among boys, higher hair Mn was associated with lower social-emotional scores [-4.6 (-8.5, -0.8)]. We observed null associations for blood Mn, language, and motor outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that maternal exposure to mancozeb and excess Mn during pregnancy may have adverse and sex-specific effects on infant neurodevelopment. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP1955.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".