| Literature DB >> 18366811 |
Luke S Tain1, Encarnación Lozano, Alberto G Sáez, Armand M Leroi.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dietary restriction (DR) results in increased longevity, reduced fecundity and reduced growth in many organisms. Though many studies have examined the effects of DR on longevity and fecundity, few have investigated the effects on growth.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2008 PMID: 18366811 PMCID: PMC2275723 DOI: 10.1186/1471-213X-8-28
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Dev Biol ISSN: 1471-213X Impact factor: 1.978
Figure 1The effects of dietary restriction on . (A) Kaplan-Maier survival curves showing the longevity of C. elegans under excess (closed circles), high (open circles) and low food (closed squares) environments (see Material and Methods). Significance is shown for excess, high, and low food, from Log Rank tests n/censored individuals 175/22, 204/110 and 238/189 respectively. (B) Daily fecundity of C. elegans under excess (closed circles), high (open circles) and low food (closed squares) environments. (C) Total fecundity of C. elegans under excess, high and low food environments; n = 36, 44 and 35 respectively. (D) Growth curves of C. elegans under excess (closed circles), high (open circles) and low food (squares) environments, n = 49, 38, and 21 respectively. Images show representative adults from high food (upper panel) and low food (lower panel) treatments. Scale bar indicates 100 μm. (E) Hypodermal (hyp7) cell number of young adult C. elegans under high and low food environments; n = 10 and 9 respectively. (F) Hypodermal (hyp7) ploidy of C. elegans (120 h) under excess, high and low food environments; n = 19, 254, and 189 respectively. All error bars show 95% confidence intervals, and asterisk show level of significance, *** shows P < 0.0001, by ANOVA.
Effect of Dietary Restriction on Body Size. All genotypes show significant (p < 0.0001), wild type-like (genotype by environment interaction term; p > 0.05), reductions in volume under DR.
| Body size (mm3) | ||||
| Genotype | High Food | Low Food | n | % reduction |
| N2 | 0.0051 (± 1 × 10-4) | 0.0021 (± 1 × 10-4) | 147, 121 | 63 |
| 0.0022 (± 1 × 10-4) | 0.0009 (± 2 × 10-4) | 106, 43 | 62 | |
| 0.0029 (± 2 × 10-4) | 0.0013 (± 8 × 10-5) | 19, 12 | 55 | |
| 0.0027 (± 1 × 10-4) | 0.0012 (± 1 × 10-4) | 41, 23 | 56 | |
| 0.0021 (± 3 × 10-4) | 0.0009 (± 5 × 10-5) | 11, 16 | 57 | |
| 0.0033 (± 2 × 10-4) | 0.0013 (± 2 × 10-4) | 26, 20 | 61 | |
| 0.0063 (± 2 × 10-4) | 0.0023 (± 1 × 10-4) | 127, 118 | 60 | |
| 0.0025 (± 1 × 10-4) | 0.001 (± 6 × 10-5) | 121, 80 | 62 | |
| 0.0020 (± 4 × 10-4) | 0.0010 (± 2 × 10-4) | 19, 15 | 50 | |
| 0.0025 (± 2 × 10-4) | 0.0010 (± 1 × 10-4) | 32, 24 | 60 | |
| 0.0010 (± 1 × 10-4) | 0.0006 (± 1 × 10-4) | 33, 22 | 40 | |
| 0.0019 (± 3 × 10-4) | 0.0009 (± 2 × 10-4) | 39, 22 | 53 | |
| 0.0050 (± 6 × 10-4) | 0.0017 (± 3 × 10-4) | 20, 9 | 66 | |
| 0.0019 (± 1 × 10-4) | 0.0007 (± 4 × 10-5) | 48, 35 | 58 | |
| 0.0028 (± 3 × 10-4) | 9 | |||
| 0.0020 (± 1 × 10-4) | 0.0008 (± 4 × 10-5) | 71, 56 | 59 | |
| 0.0011 (± 1 × 10-4) | 0.0005 (± 1 × 10-4) | 85, 45 | 52 | |
Effect of Dietary Restriction on Hypodermal Ploidy. All genotypes, unless stated (NS, p > 0.05), show highly significant (p < 0.0001) alterations from wild type ploidy responses to DR.
| Hypodermal ploidy (xC) | ||||
| Genotype | High Food | Low Food | n | % reduction |
| N2 | 10.9 (± 0.3) | 8.4 (± 0.2) | 113, 94 | 23 |
| 8.6 (± 0.3) | 7.5 (± 0.4) | 56, 25 | 13 | |
| 8.4 (± 0.5) | 7.5 (± 0.7) | 17, 12 | 11 | |
| 9.2 (± 0.3) | 8.5 (± 0.5) | 32, 21 | 8 | |
| 8.4 (± 0.5) | 7.5 (± 0.5) | 13, 13 | 11 | |
| 8.8 (± 0.4) | 7.6 (± 0.5) | 24, 17 | 14 | |
| 12.3 (± 0.3) | 11.6 (± 0.3) | 101, 88 | 5 | |
| 7.5 (± 0.5) | 6.9 (± 0.4) | 51, 32 | 8 | |
| 7.6 (± 0.7) | 7.0 (± 0.5) | 14, 11 | 8 | |
| 8.2 (± 0.4) | 7.0 (± 0.4) | 39, 23 | 15 | |
| 7.4 (± 0.3) | 6.4 (± 0.5) | 35, 22 | 14 | |
| 8.3 (± 0.3) | 7.1 (± 0.3) | 31, 18 | 14 | |
| 12.2 (± 0.9) | 8.5 (± 1.0) | 9, 8 | 30 NS | |
| 9.1 (± 0.5) | 7.8 (± 0.5) | 29, 18 | 14 | |
| 8.9 (± 0.8)' | 6 | |||
| 10.1 (± 0.7) | 7.7 (± 0.4) | 24, 17 | 24 NS | |
| 8.5 (± 0.4) | 7.0 (± 0.4) | 43, 23 | 18 | |
Figure 2Model of body size regulation by nutrients availability in . Our results suggest that food availability may regulate body size in at least two ways. First, by the "caloric pathway", that is, simply considering that food intake and its absorption by the digestive tract facilitates nutrition, which in turn may inhibit autophagy. Second, by the "sensory pathway", which refers to the sensing food through organs such as the amphids, with their ciliated neurons expressing genes like che-2, would inhibit EGL-4. Downstream, this cGMP-dependent protein kinase downregulates DBL-1 signalling, which in turn promotes hypodermal endoreduplication, upregulator of body size [36]. LON-1 inhibition by DBL-1 [28] would not influence ploidy upon nutrient activation. This model explains why the nutrient-dependent regulation that the sensory cilia proteins, EGL-4 and DBL-1 are all playing on hypodermal polyploidization has not been observed for body size; their role on body size, but not upon endoreduplication, may be obscured by the dominant influence of caloric restriction.