| Literature DB >> 22713601 |
José Diego Botezelli1, Lucieli Teresa Cambri, Ana Carolina Ghezzi, Rodrigo Augusto Dalia, Fabrício Azevedo Voltarelli, Maria Alice Rostom de Mello.
Abstract
The main purpose of this research was to investigate the alterations in the aerobic capacity and appearance of metabolic alterations in Wistar rats fed on fructose-rich diet. We separated twenty-eight rats into two groups according to diet: a control group (C) (balanced diet) and a fructose-rich diet group (F). The animals were fed these diets for 60 d (d 120 to 180). We performed insulin, glucose as well as a minimum lactate test, at d 120 and 180. At the end of the experiment, sixteen animals were euthanized, and the following main variables were analysed: aerobic capacity, the serum aspartate aminotransferase (AST) to alanine aminotransferase (ALT) ratio, serum and liver triglyceride concentrations, serum and liver thiobarbituric acid reactive substance (TBARS) concentrations, serum and liver catalase and superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity and haematoxylin-eosin histology (HE) in hepatocytes. The remaining twelve animals were submitted to an analysis of their hepatic lipogenic rate. The animals fed a fructose-rich diet exhibited a reduction in aerobic capacity, glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity and increased concentrations of triglycerides and TBARS in the liver. Catalase and SOD activities were reduced in the livers of the fructose-fed animals. In addition, the serum AST/ALT ratio was higher than that of the C group, which indicates hepatic damage, and the damage was confirmed by histology. In conclusion, the fructose-rich diet caused significant liver damage and a reduction in insulin sensitivity in the animals, which could lead to deleterious metabolic effects.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22713601 PMCID: PMC3473252 DOI: 10.1186/1476-511X-11-78
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Lipids Health Dis ISSN: 1476-511X Impact factor: 3.876
Figure 1Minimum lactate test of one animal of each group, as an example. In these particular cases, the estimated ML was 4.21 % of body weight, while the interpolated blood lactate concentration was 3.96 mM for the C (Control) animal and for F (Fructose) animal we found 2.53 % of body weight and 3.94 mM blood lactate interpolated concentration.
Figure 2Body weight change, the area under the curve (AUC) for body weight and the weight gain of the animals during the 8 weeks of the experiment. C: Control; F: Fructose. n = 14 animals per group. *Significantly different from the control group (p ≤ 0·05).
Figure 3Weekly food intake (g/100 g) and area under the curve for food intake (g/100 g*8). C: Control; F: Fructose. n = 14 animals per group. *Significantly different from the control group (p ≤ 0·05).
Blood lactate concentrations (mM) and the workloads (%BW) corresponding to the minimum lactate for both groups
| 1.3 ± 0.31 | 3.2 ± 1.2 | 3.9±0.5 | |
| F | 1.5 ± 0.2 | 4.3 ± 0.7 | 2.5 ± 0.3* |
C: Control; F: Fructose. n = 8 animals per group.
*Significantly different from the control group (p ≤ 0·05).
Glucose kinetics (mg/dl) and glucose removal rate (%/min, Kitt) during the insulin tolerance test (ITT)
| C | 85.8 ± 4.5 | 80.6 ± 5.7 | 80.5 ± 5.4 | 91.3 ± 9.3 | 1.04 ± 0.3 |
| F | 87.5 ± 7.4 | 86.9 ± 5.2 | 88.3 ± 14.8 | 95.2 ± 9.0 | 0.54 ± 0.16* |
C: Control; F: Fructose. n = 8 animals per group.
*Significantly different from the control group (p ≤ 0·05).
Serum glucose kinetics (mg/dl), serum insulin (ng/dl), area under the curve for serum glucose (mg*120 min/dl, AUC) and serum insulin (ng*120 min/dl, AUC) during the oral glucose tolerance test (oGTT)
| C | 69.6 ± 2.2 | 80.8 ± 6.7 | 81.8 ± 4.2 | 73.4 ± 1.3 | 9353.7 ± 456.6 | |
| | 2.1 ± 0.3 | 2.4 ± 0.1 | 2.3 ± 0.4 | 2.1 ± 0.3 | 277.4 ± 32.6 | |
| F | 75.2 ± 4.8 | 90.6 ± 7.3 | 85.8 ± 3.8 | 83.7 ± 2.3 | 10219.9 ± 530.2* | |
| 2.5 ± 0.3* | 2.5 ± 0.3 | 3.6 ± 0.5* | 3.4 ± 0.4* | 381.2 ± 49.5* | ||
C: Control; F: Fructose. n = 8 animals per group.
*Significantly different from the control group (p ≤ 0·05).
Glucose, triglycerides, total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and LDL cholesterol concentrations, AST/ALT ratio, SOD activity, catalase activity and TBARS concentrations in animal sera at the end of the experiment
| Glucose (mg/dl) | 83.6 ± 4.5 | 98.5 ± 10.5* |
| Triglycerides (mg/dl) | 123.4 ± 49.0 | 268.3 ± 35.1* |
| Total cholesterol (mg/dl) | 91.7 ± 9.6 | 96.3 ± 15.5 |
| HDL cholesterol (mg/dl) | 42.7 ± 5.3 | 43.5 ± 6.9 |
| LDL cholesterol (mg/dl) | 62.8 ± 3.9 | 65.4 ± 1.3 |
| AST/ALT ratio | 1.08 ± 0.4 | 2.8 ± 0.8* |
| SOD (U/ml) | 1.7 ± 0.4 | 1.5 ± 0.6 |
| Catalase (U/ml) | 42.2 ± 10.4 | 68.4 ± 6.8* |
| TBARS (μM) | 16.5 ± 2.0 | 22.2 ± 4.4* |
C, Control; F, Fructose. n = 8 animals per group.
*Significantly different from the control group (p ≤ 0·05).
Triglyceride concentrations, SOD activity, catalase activity and TBARS concentrations in animal livers at the end of the experiment
| Triglycerides (mmol/mg) | 6.4 ± 1.9 | 72.8 ± 25.7* |
| SOD (umol/min.mg protein) | 4.69 ± 1.6 | 2.6 ± 1.4 |
| Catalase (umol/min.mg protein) | 5.7 ± 1.8 | 2.2 ± 1.1* |
| TBARS (umol/mg) | 0.30 ± 0.03 | 0.35 ± 0.02* |
C, Control; F, Fructose. n = 8 animals per group.
*Significantly different from the control group (p ≤ 0·05).
Figure 4Liver HE histology of one rat at the end of the experiment as a representative example. A: Control Group; B: Fructose Group.
Figure 5Lipogenesis rate (μmol/2 h) of six rats at the end of the experiment. C: Control; F: Fructose. n = 6 animals per group. *Significantly different from the control group (p ≤ 0·05).
Figure 6Triglycerides concentration (μmol.mg) in the visceral adipose tissue of eight rats at the end of the experiment. C: Control; F: Fructose. n = 8 animals per group. *Significantly different from the control group (p ≤ 0·05).534.