| Literature DB >> 21980225 |
Maísa Silva1, Larissa de Freitas Bonomo, Riva de Paula Oliveira, Wanderson Geraldo de Lima, Marcelo Eustáquio Silva, Maria Lucia Pedrosa.
Abstract
This study evaluated the effects of the interaction of diabetes and a carbonyl iron supplemented on hepatic and pancreatic tissues, oxidative stress markers and liver peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-α expressions. Hamsters were divided: Control which received a standard AIN 93 diet; Control Iron, composed of control animals that received a diet with 0.83% carbonyl iron; Diabetic, composed of animals that received a injection of streptozotocin (50 mg/kg, intraperitoneal) on day 35; and Diabetic Iron composed of streptozotocin treated animals that received a diet supplemented with carbonyl iron. Diabetes increased the glucose level and reduced triglycerides. Diabetic Iron group showed higher levels of glucose and serum triglycerides as compared to the Diabetic group. Diabetes decreased mRNA levels of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-α. Iron attenuated the diabetes induced down regulation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-α mRNA. Moreover, diabetes increased carbonyl protein and decreased glutathione levels and catalase activity, while iron attenuated the increase in levels of carbonyl protein and attenuated the decrease in those of glutathione level and catalase activity. Histological analysis shows that supplementation iron caused an increase in the size of the islets in Control Iron. The results show that iron does not aggravated liver oxidant/antioxidant status and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-α expression in diabetic hamsters.Entities:
Keywords: PPAR-α; carbonyl iron; hamsters; oxidative stress; streptozotocin
Year: 2011 PMID: 21980225 PMCID: PMC3171682 DOI: 10.3164/jcbn.10-135
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Biochem Nutr ISSN: 0912-0009 Impact factor: 3.114
Iron status, biochemical indicators of hepatic function, body and liver weights, glycemic and lipids profile of hamsters
| Variables | Experimental groups | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Control + Iron | Diabetes | Diabetes + Iron | ANOVA ( | |||
| Iron | Diabetes | Iron × Diabetes | |||||
| Laboratory Data | |||||||
| Serum Iron µmol/l | 36.45 ± 5.34c | 73.34 ± 9.89a | 52.71 ± 5.57b | 40.06 ± 7.68c | <0.00001 | 0.001 | <0.00001 |
| Liver Iron µmol | 0.69 ± 0.24c | 4.38 ± 0.22a | 0.83 ± 0.11c | 3.09 ± 0.65b | <0.00001 | 0.417 | <0.0001 |
| ALT U/ml | 44.55 ± 10.26b | 61.16 ± 13.87b | 115.12 ± 58.39a | 70.75 ± 21.65a.b | 0.219 | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| AST U/ml | 47.66 ± 5.2b | 55.37 ± 12.87a.b | 49.29 ± 6.53b | 64.68 ± 13.33a | 0.0037 | 0.153 | 0.241 |
| Albumin µmol/l | 302.2 ± 43.66 | 315.18 ± 18.39 | 298.09 ± 9.65 | 292.07 ± 18.17 | 0.674 | 0.172 | 0.336 |
| Total Protein g/l | 30.13 ± 3.13a | 31.33 ± 2.31a | 26.32 ± 2.09b | 25.51 ± 1.1b | 0.761 | <0.00001 | 0.248 |
| Glucose mmol/l | 7.07 ± 1.15c | 7.15 ± 0.99c | 18.44 ± 4.94b | 25.15 ± 1.96a | 0.0003 | <0.00001 | 0.007 |
| Fructosamine µmol/l | 9.35 ± 1.71c | 11.72 ± 2b.c | 16.86 ± 1.9a | 14.34 ± 2.6a.b | 0.618 | <0.00001 | 0.003 |
| Amylase U/dl | 770.59 ± 5.67a | 735.95 ± 21.3b | 731.09 ± 7.37b | 726.47 ± 5.37b | 0.0001 | <0.0001 | 0.001 |
| Cholesterol mmol/l | 3.03 ± 0.44a | 3.49 ± 0.59a | 2.89 ± 0.4a | 1.91 ± 0.33b | 0.192 | <0.00001 | 0.0001 |
| Triglycerides mmol/l | 2.49 ± 0.49a.b | 1.94 ± 0.62b | 2.28 ± 0.35b | 3.39 ± 0.93a | 0.356 | 0.0049 | 0.001 |
| HDL mmol/l | 1.57 ± 0.22a | 1.84 ± 0.38a | 0.93 ± 0.11b | 0.88 ± 0.11b | 0.293 | <0.00001 | 0.05 |
| Other Fractions mmol/l | 1.46 ± 0.3b.c | 1.64 ± 0.58a.b | 2.04 ± 0.36a | 1.03 ± 0.31c | 0.02 | 0.555 | 0.0004 |
| Anthropometric Data | |||||||
| Final Body Weight g | 130.88 ± 12.99a.b | 136.11 ± 14.25a | 113.55 ± 17.92b.c | 105.13 ± 14.08c | 0.893 | <0.0001 | 0.177 |
| Autopsy Data | |||||||
| Liver Weight g | 4.36 ± 0.36a | 4.91 ± 0.69a | 3.61 ± 0.62b | 3.49 ± 0.43b | 0.0938 | <0.00001 | 0.221 |
ALT, alanine aminotransferase; ANOVA, analysis of variance; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; ¶ Values are shown as the mean ± standard deviation (n = 8). Data were analyzed by bivariate ANOVA analysis. When one of the factors was significant (p<0.05) univariate analysis with Tukey post test was performed to determine specific differences between means. Statistical differences are shown by different superscript letters.
Fig. 1Photomicrographs of histological liver sections. (A) Control group showing normal histology with a small number of cells undergoing a degenerative process (arrow). (B) Diabetic group featuring some hepatic cells with microvesicular cytoplasm indicative of the steatosis process (arrowheads). (C) Control group receiving the diet supplemented with iron (group CI) featuring ballooned hepatic cells (stars) suggesting a hydropic degenerative process and focal granulomatous inflammation (arrow). (D) Diabetic group receiving a diet supplemented with iron showing histology similar to B. Arrowhead indicates cells with cytoplasmic microvesicles. (E) Control group receiving a diet supplemented with iron and (F) diabetic group receiving a diet supplemented with iron and featuring iron deposits in hepatocytes. Insert showing citoplasmatic iron store in hepatocyte (head arrow) and Kupffer cell (star) in ×1110 magnification A, B, C and D—Hematoxylin & Eosin staining. E and F—Perls staining. Bar = 50 µM.
Fig. 2Photomicrographs of histological pancreatic sections. (A) Control group. (B) Diabetic group. Note the decrease of the size of pancreatic islets as compared to the control group. (C) Control group receiving the iron supplemented diet and showing significant increase of pancreatic islets as compared to all other groups. (D) Diabetic group receiving iron supplemented diet. Note the decreased size of pancreatic islet as compared to the control group. Hematoxylin & Eosin staining. Bar = 50 µM. Figure E- Average size of pancreatic islets from hamsters fed standard diet (C), diet supplemented with carbonyl iron (CI), diabetes (D) and diabetes supplemented with carbonyl iron (DI)*.
* Values are mean ± standard deviation (n = 6). Data were analyzed by bivariate ANOVA analysis. When one of the factors was significant (p<0.05), univariate analysis with Tukey post test was performed to determine specific differences between means. Statistical differences are shown by different superscript letters.
Hamster antioxidant and carbonyl protein levels
| Variables | Experimental Groups | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Control + Iron | Diabetes | Diabetes + Iron | ANOVA ( | |||
| Iron | Diabetes | Iron × Diabetes | |||||
| Liver glutathione nmoles/ml | 40.43 ± 4.81a | 40.12 ± 1.61a | 34.77 ± 3.06b | 40.01 ± 5.47a | 0.146 | 0.0383 | 0.097 |
| Liver catalase µmol/mg protein | 18.30 ± 3.19a | 16.75 ± 3.274a | 12.16 ± 1.34b | 17.67 ± 2.36a | 0.104 | 0.01 | 0.002 |
| Liver carbonyl protein nmol/mg protein | 2.25 ± 1.2b | 3.24 ± 1a.b | 3.74 ± 0.76a | 3.18 ± 0.63a.b | 0.685 | 0.108 | 0.0445 |
¶ Values are shown as the mean ± standard deviation (n = 8). Data were analyzed by bivariate ANOVA analysis. When one of the factors was significant (p<0.05) univariate analysis with Tukey post test was performed to determine specific differences between means. Statistical differences are shown by different superscript letters.
Fig. 3Levels of relative PPAR-α/β-actin expression in the liver of hamsters offered the standard diet (C), the C diet supplemented with carbonyl iron (CI) and diabetic hamsters offered the standard diet (D) and diabetic hamsters offered the C diet supplemented with carbonyl iron (DI)*.
* Values are mean ± standard deviation (n = 4). Data were analyzed by the Kruskal-Wallis test. Statistical differences are shown by different letters.