The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Bone Mass, Lean Mass, and Fat Mass: Same Genes or Same Environments?
Abstract
The contributions of genetic and environmental factors to the association among bone mineral density (BMD), lean mass, and fat mass were assessed in the Sydney Twin Study of Osteoporosis (Australia), 1995-1996, in 57 monozygotic and 55 dizygotic female twin pairs of Caucasian background, aged 52.8 (standard deviation, 13) years. In multiple regression analysis, lean mass was a significant determinant of areal BMD; however, fat mass was a principal determinant of volumetric BMD. Univariate model-fitting analyses indicated that 80% and 65% of variance of lean mass and fat mass, respectively, were attributable to genetic factors. The estimated heritability of BMD for lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total body BMD was 78%, 76%, and 79%, respectively. Multivariate analyses suggested that, while the association between lean mass and fat mass was attributable mainly to environmental factors (re = 0.53, p < 0.01), the association among the three BMD sites was attributable to both genetic and environmental factors (rg = 0.64-0.75, p < 0.001; re = 0.57-0.70, p < 0.001). Furthermore, genetic factors that affect lean mass or fat mass have minor effects on BMD. It is concluded that lean mass and fat mass, as well as bone density, are under strong genetic regulation. However, the associations between BMD and fat mass or between lean mass and fat mass appear to be mediated mainly via environmental influences.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Methodology for Genetic Studies of Twins and Families
Neale, M. C., & Cardon, L. R. (1992) · doi:10.1007/978-94-015-8018-2 · Cited by 4,005
Cited by
Food-frequency questionnaires: a review of their design, validation and utilisation
Cade, J. E., Burley, V. J., Warm, D. L., Thompson, R. L., & Margetts, B. M. (2004) · Nutrition Research Reviews · doi:10.1079/nrr200370 · Cited by 518
Risk factors for fractures of the proximal humerus: results from the EPIDOS prospective study
Lee, S. H., Dargent-Molina, P., & Bréart, G. (2002) · Journal of Bone and Mineral Research · doi:10.1359/jbmr.2002.17.5.817 · Cited by 251
Serum androgen levels in black, Hispanic, and white men
Litman, H. J., Bhasin, S., Link, C. L., Araujo, A. B., & McKinlay, J. B. (2006) · The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism · doi:10.1210/jc.2006-0037 · Cited by 127
Polymorphisms in the transforming growth factor beta 1 gene and osteoporosis
Langdahl, B. L., Carstens, M., Stenkjær, L., & Eriksen, E. F. (2003) · Bone · doi:10.1016/s8756-3282(02)00971-7 · Cited by 95
Heritability of BMD of Femoral Neck and Lumbar Spine: A Multivariate Twin Study of Finnish Men
Videman, T., Levälahti, E., Battié, M. C., Simonen, R., Vanninen, E., & Kaprio, J. (2007) · Journal of Bone and Mineral Research · doi:10.1359/jbmr.070606 · Cited by 68
Metadata
- Authors
- Nguyen, T. V., Howard, G. M., Kelly, P. J., & Eisman, J. A.
- Venue
- American Journal of Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1998-01-01
- Volume
- 147
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-16
- ISSN
- 0002-9262 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-6256
- OpenAlex
- W2066813035
- Cited by
- 271
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 13.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.