| Literature DB >> 29570611 |
Naiman A Khan1,2,3, Anne M Walk4, Caitlyn G Edwards5, Alicia R Jones6, Corinne N Cannavale7, Sharon V Thompson8, Ginger E Reeser9, Hannah D Holscher10,11,12.
Abstract
Excess adiposity or obesity has been inversely related to cognitive function and macular xanthophyll status. However, whether the neuroprotective effects of macular xanthophylls on cognitive function are independent of excess adiposity is unclear. We investigated the relationship between macular xanthophylls and intellectual ability among adults (N = 114) between 25 and 45 years with overweight and obesity (≥25 kg/m²). Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry and heterochromatic flicker photometry were used to assess whole body adiposity (%Fat) and macular pigment optical density (MPOD), respectively. Dietary xanthophylls (lutein and zeaxanthin) were assessed using 7-day diet records. The Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test-2 (KBIT-2) was used to assess general intelligence (IQ) as well as fluid and crystallized intelligence. Bivariate correlations revealed that MPOD was inversely related to %Fat and positively associated with IQ and fluid intelligence. Although %Fat was inversely correlated to IQ and fluid intelligence, this relationship did not persist following adjustment for sex and MPOD. Further, MPOD was an independent predictor of IQ and fluid intelligence. However, no significant relationships were observed between MPOD and crystalized intelligence. These results suggest that macular xanthophylls are selectively related to fluid intelligence, regardless of degree of adiposity among adults with overweight and obesity.Entities:
Keywords: adiposity; carotenoids; cognitive function; lutein; retinal; zeaxanthin
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29570611 PMCID: PMC5946181 DOI: 10.3390/nu10040396
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Participant characteristics.
| Variable | Mean ± SD |
|---|---|
| Age, years | 34.3 ± 6.1 |
| Sex | 69 (F), 45 (M) |
| Income | |
| Low [<$41,000], | 37 (32) |
| Medium [$41,000 | 36 (32) |
| High [>$70,000], | 41 (36) |
| Dietary Lutein and Zeaxanthin, µg | 2319.7 ± 3503.0 |
| Body Mass Index, kg/m2 | 31.9 ± 5.3 |
| Overweight, | 55 (48) |
| Obese, | 59 (52) |
| Whole body Adiposity, % | 37.7 ± 8.9 |
| Macular Pigment Optical Density | 0.46 ± 0.21 |
| Intelligence Quotient | 109.5 ± 12.9 |
| Crystallized Intelligence | 110.8 ± 12.9 |
| Fluid Intelligence | 106.0 ± 15.0 |
Bivariate correlations between demographics, diet, adiposity, MPOD, and intelligence.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Age | |||||||||
| 2. a Sex | −0.04 | ||||||||
| 0.68 | |||||||||
| 3. Income | 0.50 ** | −0.05 | |||||||
| 0.00 | 0.57 | ||||||||
| 4. Dietary LZ | −0.08 | −0.01 | 0.09 | ||||||
| 0.38 | 0.88 | 0.33 | |||||||
| 5. %Fat | 0.06 | −0.77 ** | 0.06 | −0.09 | |||||
| 0.55 | 0.00 | 0.52 | 0.35 | ||||||
| 6. MPOD | −0.18 | 0.18 | −0.06 | 0.06 | −0.19 * | ||||
| 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.55 | 0.52 | 0.04 | |||||
| 7. IQ | 0.02 | 0.26 ** | 0.15 | 0.16 | −0.22 * | 0.24 * | |||
| 0.81 | 0.01 | 0.12 | 0.08 | 0.02 | 0.01 | ||||
| 8. Fluid Intelligence | −0.01 | 0.23 * | 0.08 | 0.14 | −0.24 * | 0.25 ** | 0.80 ** | ||
| 0.95 | 0.01 | 0.38 | 0.14 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.00 | |||
| 9. Crystallized Intelligence | 0.11 | 0.20 * | 0.18 | 0.13 | −0.13 | 0.13 | 0.85 ** | 0.36 ** | |
| 0.27 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.16 | 0.16 | 0.18 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
MPOD, macular pigment optical density; %Fat, whole body adiposity; LZ, dietary lutein and zeaxanthin; IQ, intelligence quotient. * Significant at p ≤ 0.05 (two-tailed); ** Significant at p ≤ 0.01 (two-tailed); a Females coded as 0 and males coded as 1.
Figure 1(a–c): Scatterplots illustrating relationships between macular pigment optical density (MPOD) and IQ (a); fluid intelligence (b); and crystallized intelligence (c).
Regression analyses explaining variability in intelligence outcomes.
| Intelligence Quotient | Fluid Intelligence | Crystallized Intelligence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β | β | β | |||||||
| 0.15 ** | 0.13 * | 0.11 | |||||||
| Age | <0.01 | 1.00 | <0.01 | 0.99 | 0.06 | 0.56 | |||
| Sex | 0.24 | 0.09 | 0.13 | 0.37 | 0.27 | 0.07 | |||
| Income | 0.16 | 0.14 | 0.10 | 0.37 | 0.15 | 0.16 | |||
| Dietary LZ | 0.14 | 0.12 | 0.11 | 0.23 | 0.13 | 0.17 | |||
| %Fat | 0.01 | 0.93 | −0.09 | 0.52 | 0.09 | 0.53 | |||
| MPOD | 0.20 * | 0.04 | 0.20 * | 0.03 | 0.11 | 0.25 | |||
* Significant at p ≤ 0.05; ** Significant at p ≤ 0.01.