Genetic and Common Environmental Contributions to Familial Resemblances in Plasma Carotenoid Concentrations in Healthy Families
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carotenoids have shown an interindividual variability that may be due to genetic factors. The only study that has reported heritability of serum α- and β-carotene has not considered the environmental component. This study aimed to estimate the contribution of both genetic and common environmental effects to the variance of carotenoid concentrations and to test whether their phenotypic correlations with cardiometabolic risk factors are explained by shared genetic and environmental effects. Plasma carotenoid concentrations (α-carotene, β-carotene, β-cryptoxanthin, lutein, lycopene, zeaxanthin, and total carotenoids) of 48 healthy subjects were measured. Heritability estimates of carotenoid concentrations were calculated using the variance component method. Lutein and lycopene showed a significant familial effect (p = 6 × 10−6 and 0.0043, respectively). Maximal heritability, genetic heritability, and common environmental effect were computed for lutein (88.3%, 43.8%, and 44.5%, respectively) and lycopene (45.2%, 0%, and 45.2%, respectively). Significant phenotypic correlations between carotenoid concentrations and cardiometabolic risk factors were obtained for β-cryptoxanthin, lycopene, and zeaxanthin. Familial resemblances in lycopene concentrations were mainly attributable to common environmental effects, while for lutein concentrations they were attributable to genetic and common environmental effects. Common genetic and environmental factors may influence carotenoids and cardiometabolic risk factors, but further studies are needed to better understand the potential impact on disease development.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".