4.6 Article

The effect of early human diet on caudate volumes and IQ

Journal

PEDIATRIC RESEARCH
Volume 63, Issue 3, Pages 308-314

Publisher

INT PEDIATRIC RESEARCH FOUNDATION, INC
DOI: 10.1203/PDR.0b013e318163a271

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Medical Research Council Funding Source: Medline
  2. NCRR NIH HHS [U24 RR021382, P41-RR14075] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NIAID NIH HHS [R01 RR16594-01AI] Funding Source: Medline
  4. NIBIB NIH HHS [U54 EB005149, R01 EB001550] Funding Source: Medline
  5. NINDS NIH HHS [R01 NS052585-01] Funding Source: Medline
  6. Wellcome Trust Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Early nutrition in animals affects both behavior and brain structure. In humans, randomized trials show that early nutrition affects later cognition, notably in males. We hypothesized that early nutrition also influences brain structure, measurable using magnetic resonance imaging. Prior research suggested that the candate nucleus may be especially vulnerable to early environment and that its size relates to IQ. To test the hypothesis that the caudate nucleus could be a neural substrate for cognitive effects of early nutrition, we compared two groups of adolescents, assigned a Standard- or High-nutrient diet in the postnatal weeks after preterm birth. Groups had similar birth status and neonatal course. Scans and IQ data were obtained from 76 adolescents and volumes of several subcortical structures were calculated. The High-nutrient group had significantly larger caudate volumes and higher Verbal IQ (VIQ). Caudate volumes correlated significantly with VIQ in the Standard-nutrient group only. Caudate volume was influenced by early nutrition and related selectively to VIQ in males, but not in females. Our findings may partly explain the effects of early diet on cognition and the predominant effects in males. They are among the first to show that human brain structure can be influenced by early nutrition.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available