Search

Although environmental exposure to multiple metals is common, epidemiological studies on the associations of exposure to 23 metals with kidney function have not been analyzed. We aimed to investigate the associations of 23 metals levels with renal function. We conducted a cross-sectional study in four rural regions of Hunan province. Plasma and urine metals levels were determined by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer (ICP-MS). Two-level logistic regression was used to investigate the associations of metals levels with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) with adjustment for confounding factors. We conducted a sensitivity analysis of the results using the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation. A total of 3553 participants completed the investigation. Five metals (plasma arsenic and molybdenum; urine copper, rubidium, and strontium) were identified to be significantly associated with renal function. Participants in the highest quartile of plasma arsenic and molybdenum were at 17.95 (95% CI: 6.35–50.76) and 24.23 (95% CI: 7.42–79.19) fold risk of abnormal eGFR, respectively, compared with the lowest quartile. The highest quartiles of urine copper, rubidium, and strontium were associated with 3.70 (95% CI:1.92–7.14), 0.16 (95% CI:0.07–0.37) and 0.08 (95% CI: 0.03–0.21) fold risk of abnormal eGFR. The sensitivity analysis revealed that plasma arsenic, molybdenum and urine copper, rubidium and strontium levels retained similar associations with abnormal eGFR. Plasma arsenic and molybdenum, and urine copper are risk factors for abnormal renal function, while urine rubidium and strontium are protective factors for renal function. • A cross-sectional study was conducted in four rural regions of Hunan province. • The associations of multiple metal levels with renal function was investigated. • Multiple metals in plasma and urine are associated with abnormal eGFR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Archaeological, genetic, and linguistic evidence has supported the idea that northern China is the original center of modern Sino‐Tibetan‐speaking populations. However, the demographic history of subsequent southward migration and genetic admixture of Han Chinese with surrounding indigenous populations remain uncharacterized, and the language shifts and assimilations accompanied by movement of people, or just an adaptation of cultural ideas among populations in central China is still unclear, especially for Tibeto‐Burman‐speaking Tujia and central Han Chinese populations. To resolve this, we genotyped over 60K genome‐wide markers in 505 unrelated individuals from 63 indigenous populations. Our results showed both studied Han and Tujia were at the intermediate position in the modern East Asian North–South genetic cline and there was a correlation between the genetic composition and the latitude. We observed the strong genetic assimilation between Tujia people and central Han Chinese, which suggested massive population movements and genetic admixture under language borrowing. Tujia and central Han Chinese could be modeled as a two‐way admixture deriving primary ancestry from a northern ancestral population closely related to the ancient DevilsCave and present‐day Tibetans and a southern ancestral population closely related to the present‐day Tai‐Kadai and Austronesian‐speaking groups. The ancestral northern population we suspect to be related to the Neolithic millet farming groups in the Yellow River Basin or central China. We showed that the newly genotyped populations in Hubei Province had a higher proportion of DevilsCave or modern Tungusic/Mongolic‐related northern ancestries, while the Hunan populations harbored a higher proportion of Austronesian/Tai‐Kadai‐related southern ancestries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]