A multivariate analysis of fatness and relative fat patterning

Abstract

Skinfold measurements (triceps, subscapular, suprailiac and medial calf) in four samples (376 boys, 352 girs, 338 men and 380 women from rural Colombia) were subjected to principal components analysis to identify components of obesity and relative fat patterning. Three components emerged which were similar in the four samples: a first component of fatness explaining 70-80% of the variance and two fat pattern components each explaining 10-15% of the variance: trunk-extremity and upper-lower body. Fatness and the trunk-extremity pattern components changed with age in children (7-12 years), but none of the components changed with age in adults (25-60+). The fatter tended to be more patterned in both age groups. Canonical correlation analysis revealed that socioeconomic status was more related to fatness than to patterning. With the exception of brothers, all first degree relatives (sib, parent-off-spring) and spouses were correlated in fatness. Some of the correlations between relatives--usually sibs, but not spouses--were also significant for the pattern components, suggesting a genetic basis for the known stability of this characteristic (Garn, '55a). Principal components analysis is a useful multivariate alternative for quantitative studies of anthropometric patterning.

The genetics of human fatness

“…This meant that the fatness variable studied must at least be some indirect Brook et al (1975), Osborne and DeGeorge (1959), Vandenberg (1962) Adoption and Biron et al (1977), Bouchard et al (1982), Garn et al (1976aGarn et al ( ,b, 1977aGarn et al ( .b, 1979a, Hartz cohabitation et al (1977), Shenker et al (1974), Withers (1964) Familial Bayley (1954), Borjeson (1962Borjeson ( , 1964, Bouchard (1980), Bouchard et al (1980a,b), Bowles aggregation (1932), Garn et al (1975), Garn and Clark (1975), Hawk and Brook (1979), Hewitt (1957), Howells (1966), Little and Malina (unpublished data), Martin et al (1973), Matsuki and Yoda (1971), McHenry and Giles (1971), Mueller (1977Mueller ( ,1978, Mueller and Titcomb (1977), Mueller and Reid (1979), Mueller and Malina (1980), Reynolds (1951), Savard et al (1983), Susanne (1975), Tanner and Israelsohn (1963), Wolanski (1976) (weight adjusted for height, body mass index, skinfold, somatotype, etc.) or direct (e.g., body density) measure of body fatness.…”

“…The socioeconomic score (SES) was based on seven observations taken at each household visited during the course of the study. Complete details of the study methodology have been published (Mueller and Titcomb, 1977;Mueller and Reid, 1979). Table 7 indicates the percentage of variation accounted for by regression of triceps and subscapular skinfolds on the SES variables.…”

“…However, the effect on fat patterning was much less than that on fatness itself (Ramirez and Mueller, 1980). (3) Spouses were correlated in fatness but not in components of fat patterning in rural Colombia (Mueller and Reid, 1979). (4) Olympic and high school athletes varied by sport/event classes in fatness but differed little in fat patterning (Malina et aI., 1982;Mueller et aI., 1982).…”

“…A series of recent adoption studies have also attempted to assess the contribution of environment to familial aggregation of fatness (Shenker et aI., 1974; Garn et aI., 1976a Garn et aI., ,b, 1977a Garn et aI., ,b, 1979a Biron et aI., 1977; Hartz et aI., 1977). Other techniques have been used to separate the contribution of genes and environment to familial resemblance in body weight and fatness such as partial correlation (Mueller, 1977(Mueller, , 1978Mueller and Reid, 1979;Bouchard, 1980;Mueller and Malina, 1980), path analysis (Rao et aI., 1975; Bouchard et aI., 1980b), and families of identical twins (Meany et aI., unpublished). Some studies on the genetics of growth have included measurements indirectly related to fatness such as body mass index, body circumferences, and somatotypes (Bowles, 1932; Bayley, 1954;Vandenberg, 1962;Withers, 1964;McHenry and Giles, 1971;Susanne, 1975; Bouchard et aI., 1980a).…”

Precision of measuring body fat distribution in adolescent African American girls from the ‘healthy growth study’

“…0.109~wt(kg)/ht(m) C = (Valdez et al, 1992); subscapular/thigh and triceps/subscapular skinfold ratios; and a central fat skinfold ratio (CFR) (Baumgartner et al, 1987): Two principal components from five skinfolds were also calculated: (PC1 = body fat, and PC2 = central body fat distribution), as described by Mueller and Reid (1979), Mueller and Wohlleb (19811, and Baumgartner et al (1986). These comprise weighted linear combinations of the skinfolds (vectors), all weighted positively in the case of PC1 and weighted with opposite signs assigned the central and peripheral sites of the body for PC2.…”