Animal and plant protein intake during infancy and childhood DNA methylation: a meta-analysis in the NutriPROGRAM consortium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Higher early-life animal protein intake is associated with a higher childhood obesity risk compared to plant protein intake. Differential DNA methylation may represent an underlying mechanism.Methods We analysed associations of infant animal and plant protein intakes with DNA methylation in early (2−6 years, N = 579) and late (7̄−12 years, N = 604) childhood in two studies. Study-specific robust linear regression models adjusted for relevant confounders were run, and then meta-analysed using a fixed-effects model. We also performed sex-stratified meta-analyses. Follow-up analyses included pathway analysis and eQTM look-up.Results Infant animal protein intake was not associated with DNA methylation in early childhood, but was associated with late-childhood DNA methylation at cg21300373 (P = 4.27 × 10¯8, MARCHF1) and cg10633363 (P = 1.09 × 10¯7, HOXB9) after FDR correction. Infant plant protein intake was associated with early-childhood DNA methylation at cg25973293 (P = 2.26 × 10−7, C1orf159) and cg15407373 (P = 2.13 × 10−7, MBP) after FDR correction. There was no overlap between the findings from the animal and plant protein analyses. We did not find enriched functional pathways at either time point using CpGs associated with animal and plant protein. These CpGs were not previously associated with childhood gene expression. Sex-stratified meta-analyses showed sex-specific DNA methylation associations for both animal and plant protein intake.Conclusion Infant animal protein intake was associated with DNA methylation at two CpGs in late childhood. Infant plant protein intake was associated with DNA methylation in early childhood at two CpGs. A potential mediating role of DNA methylation at these CpGs between infant protein intake and health outcomes requires further investigation.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".