Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T12:18:50.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic Basis of Individual Differences in Tissue Composition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

T. Ohtsuki  and
V. Klissouras
T. Ohtsuki
Affiliation:
Exercise Physiology Laboratory, University of Tokyo, Japan
V. Klissouras*
Affiliation:
Ergophysiology Laboratory, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
*
Physiology Department, McGill University, P. O. Box 6070, Station « A », Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H3C 3G1

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

A total of 10 pairs of twin adolescent boys, 14 MZ and 5 DZ, were used to determine the relative contribution of the genotype to the individual differences observed in surface density of muscle, subcutaneous fat, and bone. The cross-sectional areas of these tissue components were calculated from photographs of the upper arm, taken by means of an ultrasonic apparatus. The respective mean percentage intrapair difference in MZ and DZ twins was 6.9 and 9.8 for total area, 6.6 and 7.8 for muscle, 13.9 and 32.0 for fat, and 6.7 and 31.3 for bone tissue. Interindividual variations in bone only could be ascribed to genetic differences.

Type
5. Twin Studies in Human Genetics
Information
Acta geneticae medicae et gemellologiae: twin research , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , January 1976 , pp. 157 - 163
Copyright
Copyright © The International Society for Twin Studies 1976

References

REFERENCES

Heath, B.H. 1963. Need for modification of somato-type methodology. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., 21: 227–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heirnaux, J. 1963. Heredity and environment: their influence on human morphology. A comparison of two independent lines of study. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., 21: 575–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ikai, M., Fukunaga, T. 1968. Calculation of muscle strength per unit cross-sectional area of human muscle by means of ultrasonic measurement. Int. Z. Angew. Physiol., 26: 26–32.Google Scholar
Ikai, M., Fukunaga, T. 1969. On the ultrasonic method of analysing human body composition. Med. Ultrason., 7: 17–19.Google Scholar
Inouye, E. 1962. Zygosity-diagnosis of Japanese twins by Essen-Moller's formula (II). In Fujita, Tsunetaro (ed.): Studies on Twins III (in Japanese). Ninon Gakujyutsu Shinkokai.Google Scholar
Klissouras, V. 1971. Heritability of adaptive variation. J. Appl. Physiol., 31: 338–344.Google Scholar
Klissouras, V., Pirnay, F., Petit, J.M. 1973. Adaptation to maximal effoit: genetics and age. Appl. Physiol., 35: 288–293.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Komi, P., Klissouras, V., Karvinen, E. 1973. Genetic variation in neuromuscular performance. Int. Z. Angew. Physiol., 31: 289–304.Google Scholar
Petersen, G. 1968. Atlas for Somatotyping Children. Assen, Netherlands: Royal Vangorcum Ltd. Google Scholar
Sheldon, W.H., Dupertuis, C.W., McDermott, E. 1954. Atlas of Men. New York: Harper and Bros.Google Scholar
Tanner, J.M. 1952. The effect of weight-training on physique. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., 10: 427–461.Google Scholar
Tanner, J.M. 1964. Analysis and classification of physique. In Harrison, G.A., Weiner, J.S., Tanner, J.M., Barnicot, N.A. (eds.): Human Biology. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Wells, J. B., Jokl, E., Bohanen, J. 1963. The effect of intensive physical training upon body composition of adolescent girls. J. Ass. Phys. Ment. Rehab., 17: 68–72.Google Scholar
Vandenberg, S.G. 1962. How «stable» are heritability estimates? A comparison of heritability estimates from six anthropometric studies. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., 20: 331–338.Google Scholar