4.3 Article Proceedings Paper

Growth of han migrants at high altitude in Central Asia

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN BIOLOGY
卷 16, 期 4, 页码 405-419

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ajhb.20042

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Han Chinese of low-altitude descent have been living in Qinghai Province of Western China for at least two millennia. For most of this time they have lived at elevations under 2,500 m. However, during the last four decades an increasing number of Han have moved into high-altitude towns at elevations over 3,000 m, and some above 4,000 m. There are now sufficient numbers of Han descendants who have been born and raised at high altitude to allow a comparison of their morphological and physiological growth patterns with low-altitude Han to detect the effect of hypoxia. The field study reported here was conducted by collaborating Chinese and American researchers over a 6-year period, and included 1,227 Han living at high altitude in Qinghai and at low altitude near Beijing. This study demonstrates that Han born and raised at high altitude are smaller and lighter than those at low altitude-particularly as children and adolescents. Slower growth at high altitude may be a consequence of hypoxia, but it also corresponds to poorer economic conditions in rural Qinghai Province, and thus may reflect nutritional inadequacies. Differences in altitude and/or nutrition do not seem to affect thorax dimensions, since, relative to stature, chest dimensions are similar at both high and low altitudes. Nevertheless, lung volumes are higher among Han at high altitude, possibly reflecting the influence of hypoxia on alveolar growth. The hematological values of Han growing up at 3,200 m are not different from those at low altitude-an unusual finding relative to other low-altitude groups that may reflect population differences in response to hypoxia. At 3,800 m and 4,300 m, however, Han show elevated hemoglobin relative to Han at low altitude. Published 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.(dagger)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据