Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Aug 1.
Published in final edited form as: Biogerontology. 2016 Mar 10;17(4):725–736. doi: 10.1007/s10522-016-9643-y

Table 6. Interaction between RMR and the UCP3 variant in female nonagenarians explains FI34 after adjustment for muscle mass and physical activity.

rs591758 rs675547 rs1626521



b se b se b se
FFM -5.7e-3 ** 2.1e-3 -5.4e-3 * 2.3e-3 -3.6e-3 2.3e-3
EESI -9.7e-6 ** 3.0e-6 -1.1e-5 ** 3.1e-6 -1.2e-3 *** 2.9e-6
RMR 3.1e-4 * 1.5e-4 2.1e-4 1.7e-4 5.1e-6 1.5e-4
SNP -6.5e-2 9.7e-2 -0.15 0.11 -0.41 ** 0.13
RMRxSNP 1.0e-4 9.5e-5 1.8e-4 1.0e-4 4.1e-4 ** 1.3e-4




R2 0.56 0.52 0.52
P < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001

b = regression coefficient

*

p ≤ 0.05,

**

p ≤ 0.01,

***

p ≤ 0.001);

se = standard error of b; FFM = fat-free mass; EESI= energy expenditure summary index in the Yale Physical Activity Survey; RMR = resting metabolic rate; SNP = additive genetic model for each SNP; R2= adjusted R2; P = p value of the coefficient of determination (R2) obtained by application of the F-statistic in analysis of variance; sample size (n = 37)