Abstract
It is well-established that both the child’s genetic endowments as well as maternal smoking during pregnancy impact offspring birth weight. In this paper we move beyond the nature versus nurture debate by investigating the interaction between genetic endowments and this critical prenatal environmental exposure – maternal smoking – in determining birth weight. We draw on longitudinal data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) study and replicate our results using data from the UK Biobank. Genetic endowments of the children are proxied with a polygenic score that is constructed based on the results of the most recent genome-wide association study of birth weight. We instrument the maternal decision to smoke during pregnancy with a genetic variant (rs1051730) located in the nicotine receptor gene CHRNA3. This genetic variant is associated with the number of cigarettes consumed daily, and we present evidence that this is plausibly the only channel through which the maternal genetic variant affects the child’s birth weight. Additionally, we deal with the misreporting of maternal smoking by using measures of cotinine, a biomarker of nicotine, collected from the mother’s urine during their pregnancy. We confirm earlier findings that genetic endowments as well as maternal smoking during pregnancy significantly affects the child’s birth weight. However, we do not find evidence of meaningful interactions between genetic endowments and an adverse fetal environment, suggesting that the child’s genetic predisposition cannot cushion the damaging effects of maternal smoking.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The authors acknowledge funding from NORFACE under the Dynamics of Inequality (DIAL) programme(grant number 462-16-100). Research reported in this publication was also supported by the National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R56AG058726.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the ALSPAC Ethics and Law Committee and the Local Research Ethics Committees
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
1 The authors gratefully acknowledge funding from NORFACE under the Dynamics of Inequality (DIAL) programme (grant number 462-16-100). Research reported in this publication was also supported by the National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R56AG058726. The authors thank Rachel Freathy and Robin Beaumont for sharing the birth weight GWAS meta-analysis summary statistics depleted of the ALSPAC and UK Biobank GWAS summary results. They also thank Andrew Jones, Stefanie Schurer, and participants of internal seminars, the DIAL conference, the Mendelian Randomization conference, and the European Health Economics Association conference for providing valuable comments on earlier versions of this study. This research has been conducted using data from the Avon Longitudinal Survey of Parents and Children (ALSPAC), and the UK Biobank Resource under Application Number 41382. Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the ALSPAC Ethics and Law Committee and the Local Research Ethics Committees. The data can be obtained by filing a request directly to the University of Bristol (https://proposals.epi.bristol.ac.uk/). The authors are willing to assist. We are extremely grateful to all the families who took part in this study, the midwives for their help in recruiting them, and the whole ALSPAC team, which includes interviewers, computer and laboratory technicians, clerical workers, research scientists, volunteers, managers, receptionists and nurses. The UK Medical Research Council and Wellcome (Grant ref: 217065/Z/19/Z) and the University of Bristol provide core support for ALSPAC. A comprehensive list of grants funding is available on the ALSPAC website (http://www.bristol.ac.uk/alspac/external/documents/grant-acknowledgements.pdf). This publication is the work of the authors and they will serve as guarantors for the contents of this paper.
5 ALSPAC’s study website contains details of all the available data through a fully searchable data dictionary and variable search tool, see http://www.bristol.ac.uk/alspac/researchers/our-data/.
Data Availability
The data can be obtained by filing a request directly to the University of Bristol (https://proposals.epi.bristol.ac.uk/)
