Disentangling the genetics of lean mass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lean body mass (LM) plays an important role in mobility and metabolic function. We previously identified five loci associated with LM adjusted for fat mass in kilograms. Such an adjustment may reduce the power to identify genetic signals having an association with both lean mass and fat mass. OBJECTIVES: To determine the impact of different fat mass adjustments on genetic architecture of LM and identify additional LM loci. METHODS: We performed genome-wide association analyses for whole-body LM (20 cohorts of European ancestry with n = 38,292) measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry) or bioelectrical impedance analysis, adjusted for sex, age, age2, and height with or without fat mass adjustments (Model 1 no fat adjustment; Model 2 adjustment for fat mass as a percentage of body mass; Model 3 adjustment for fat mass in kilograms). RESULTS: Seven single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in separate loci, including one novel LM locus (TNRC6B), were successfully replicated in an additional 47,227 individuals from 29 cohorts. Based on the strengths of the associations in Model 1 vs Model 3, we divided the LM loci into those with an effect on both lean mass and fat mass in the same direction and refer to those as sumo wrestler loci (FTO and MC4R). In contrast, loci with an impact specifically on LM were termed body builder loci (VCAN and ADAMTSL3). Using existing available genome-wide association study databases, LM increasing alleles of SNPs in sumo wrestler loci were associated with an adverse metabolic profile, whereas LM increasing alleles of SNPs in body builder loci were associated with metabolic protection. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, we identified one novel LM locus (TNRC6B). Our results suggest that a genetically determined increase in lean mass might exert either harmful or protective effects on metabolic traits, depending on its relation to fat mass.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".