| Literature DB >> 23342013 |
Ann M Walsh1, Torres Sweeney, Bojlul Bahar, John V O'Doherty.
Abstract
Chitosan, a natural polysaccharide comprising copolymers of glucosamine and N-acetylglucosamine, has been shown to have anti-obesity properties. Two experiments (Exp. 1 and Exp. 2) were performed to determine the role of chitosan on dietary intake, body weight gain, and fat deposition in a pig model, as well as identifying potential mechanisms underlying the anti-obesity effect of chitosan. In Exp. 1, the nutrient digestibility experiment, 16 pigs (n = 4/treatment) were randomly allocated to one of four dietary treatments as follows: 1) basal diet; 2) basal diet plus 300 ppm chitosan; 3) basal diet plus 600 ppm chitosan; 4) basal diet plus 1200 ppm chitosan. The main observation was that crude fat digestibility was lower in the 1200 ppm chitosan group when compared with the control group (P<0.05). In Exp. 2, a total of 80 pigs (n = 20/treatment) were offered identical dietary treatments to that offered to animals in Exp. 1. Blood samples were collected on day 0, day 35 and at the end of the experiment (day 57). Animals offered diets containing 1200 ppm chitosan had a lower daily dietary intake (P<0.001) and body weight gain (P<0.001) from day 35 to 57 when compared with all the other treatment groups. Animals offered diets containing 1200 ppm chitosan had a significantly lower final body weight (P<0.01) when compared with all the other treatment groups. The decreased dietary intake observed in the 1200 ppm chitosan group was associated with increased serum leptin concentrations (P<0.001) and a decrease in serum C-reactive protein (CRP) concentrations (P<0.05). In conclusion, the results of this study highlight novel endocrine mechanisms involving the modulation of serum leptin and CRP concentrations by which chitosan exhibits anti-obesity properties in vivo.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23342013 PMCID: PMC3544718 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0053828
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Composition and chemical analysis of basal diet1 (g/kg, unless otherwise indicated).
| Composition | Basal diet |
| Wheat | 382.6 |
| Barley | 250.0 |
| Soya bean meal | 170.0 |
| Maize | 150.0 |
| Soya oil | 18.0 |
| Limestone | 12.5 |
| Salt | 5.0 |
| Monocalcium phosphate | 6.6 |
| Vitamins and minerals premix | 2.5 |
| Lysine HCl | 2.3 |
| L-threonine | 0.5 |
|
| |
| Dry matter | 895.9 |
| Crude protein (N X 6.25) | 177.9 |
| Neutral detergent fibre | 130.5 |
| Ash | 43.5 |
| Gross energy (MJ/kg) | 16.1 |
| Lysine | 9.2 |
| Methionine and cysteine | 5.5 |
| Threonine | 6.2 |
| Tryptophan | 1.9 |
| Calcium | 9.4 |
| Phosphorous | 5.8 |
Treatments: 1) basal diet; 2) basal diet plus 300 ppm chitosan; 3) basal plus 600 ppm chitosan; 4) basal plus 1200 ppm chitosan.
The premix provided vitamins and minerals (per kg diet) as follows: 4.2 mg of retinol, 0.07 mg of cholecalciferol, 80 mg of α-tocopherol, 120 mg of cupricas cuprous sulphate, 100 mg iron as ferrous sulphate, 100 mg of zinc as zinc oxide, 0.3 mg of selenium as sodium selenite, 25 mg of manganese as manganous oxide, 0.2 mg of iodine as calcium iodate on a calcium sulphate/calcium carbonate carrier, 2 mg of thiamine, 15 µm of cyanocobalamin, 7 mg of pantothenic acid, 2 mg of riboflavin, 7 mg of niacin, 3 mg of adenine and 100 mg of phytase (Natuphos) (Nutec, Co. Kildare, Ireland).
Calculated for tabulated nutritional composition [48].
Effects of varying chitosan inclusion level on nutrient digestibility.
| Dietary chitosan, ppm | ||||||
| 0 | 300 | 600 | 1200 | SEM |
| |
|
| ||||||
| Dry matter intake (kg/day) | 2.294 | 2.334 | 2.133 | 2.252 | 0.0914 | 0.516 |
| Urine output (kg/day) | 5.535 | 5.062 | 4.746 | 4.998 | 0.6979 | 0.874 |
|
| ||||||
| Dry matter | 0.875 | 0.872 | 0.877 | 0.875 | 0.0061 | 0.979 |
| Organic matter | 0.887 | 0.884 | 0.890 | 0.886 | 0.0068 | 0.961 |
| Neutral detergent fibre | 0.740 | 0.740 | 0.744 | 0.759 | 0.0161 | 0.778 |
| Gross energy | 0.862 | 0.857 | 0.866 | 0.860 | 0.0086 | 0.929 |
| Ash | 0.664 | 0.640 | 0.615 | 0.660 | 0.0247 | 0.675 |
| Crude fat | 0.788b | 0.722ab | 0.742ab | 0.704a | 0.0300 | 0.049 |
Values represents least square means (n = 4).
Means with the same superscript within rows are not significantly different (P>0.05).
Effect of varying chitosan inclusion level on dietary intake, body weight gain and feed efficiency ratio of the animals.
| Dietary chitosan, ppm | ||||||
| 0 | 300 | 600 | 1200 | SEM |
| |
| Final body weight (kg) | 116.95b | 115.99b | 114.80b | 109.89a | 1.377 | 0.003 |
|
| ||||||
| Daily dietary intake(kg/day) | 2.295 | 2.128 | 2.226 | 2.227 | 0.0671 | 0.387 |
| Daily chitosanintake (g/day) | 0.000a | 0.640b | 1.326c | 2.675d | 0.0470 | <0.0001 |
| Daily body weightgain (kg/day) | 0.998 | 0.960 | 0.926 | 0.937 | 0.0403 | 0.621 |
| Feed efficiencyratio | 0.442 | 0.476 | 0.412 | 0.430 | 0.0193 | 0.128 |
|
| ||||||
| Daily dietary intake(kg/day) | 2.641 | 2.730 | 2.701 | 2.695 | 0.0722 | 0.858 |
| Daily chitosanintake (g/day) | 0.000a | 0.820b | 1.615c | 3.237d | 0.0633 | <0.0001 |
| Daily body weightgain (kg/day) | 0.991 | 0.976 | 0.921 | 0.920 | 0.0470 | 0.613 |
| Feed efficiencyratio (kg/kg) | 0.375 | 0.360 | 0.341 | 0.341 | 0.0158 | 0.369 |
|
| ||||||
| Daily dietary intake(kg/day) | 2.908b | 3.042b | 2.945b | 2.389a | 0.0848 | <0.0001 |
| Daily chitosanintake (g/day) | 0.000a | 0.913b | 1.762c | 2.870d | 0.0708 | <0.0001 |
| Daily body weightgain (kg/day) | 0.962b | 0.954b | 0.940b | 0.654a | 0.0460 | <0.0001 |
| Feedefficiency ratio(kg/kg) | 0.332b | 0.317b | 0.317b | 0.268a | 0.0131 | 0.005 |
|
| ||||||
| Daily dietary intake(kg/day) | 2.379 | 2.623 | 2.435 | 2.445 | 0.0680 | 0.071 |
| Daily chitosanintake (g/day) | 0.000a | 0.788b | 1.455c | 2.936d | 0.0510 | <0.0001 |
| Daily body weightgain (kg/day) | 0.977b | 0.965b | 0.943b | 0.861a | 0.0259 | 0.009 |
| Feed efficiency ratio(kg/kg) | 0.424b | 0.372a | 0.384a | 0.360a | 0.0120 | 0.003 |
Values represents least square means (n = 20).
Means with the same superscript within rows are not significantly different (P>0.05).
Feed efficiency ratio; body weight gain (kg)/dietary intake (kg).
Effects of varying chitosan inclusion level on carcass characteristics of the animals.
| Dietary chitosan, ppm | ||||||
| 0 | 300 | 600 | 1200 | SEM |
| |
| Carcass characteristics | ||||||
| Carcass weight (kg) | 89.39b | 89.58b | 88.66b | 85.31a | 0.986 | 0.011 |
| Kill-out proportion (%) | 76.31 | 77.23 | 77.28 | 77.70 | 0.385 | 0.095 |
| Back fat depth (mm) | 12.57 | 12.34 | 13.29 | 11.79 | 0.641 | 0.432 |
| Carcass fat content (kg) | 34.93b | 34.63ab | 34.86b | 32.91a | 0.749 | 0.046 |
| Lean (%) | 58.51 | 58.32 | 57.62 | 58.99 | 0.657 | 0.527 |
| Lean yield (kg) | 51.75 | 52.44 | 51.33 | 50.01 | 0.871 | 0.253 |
| Loin eye muscledepth | 55.04 | 55.00 | 53.81 | 52.46 | 0.939 | 0.185 |
| Carcass average dailygain (kg/day) | 0.886b | 0.898b | 0.893b | 0.816a | 0.0166 | 0.002 |
Values represents least square means (n = 20).
Means with the same superscript within rows are not significantly different (P>0.05).
Loin eye muscle depth is measured between the 10th and 11th ribs on pig carcasses and is used in the estimation of carcass leaness.
Figure 1A.
Differences in serum leptin concentration over time at days 0 (basal), 35 and 57. Values are mean with the SEM represented by vertical bars. B. Differences in serum C-reactive protein (CRP) concentration over time at days 0 (basal), 35 and 57. Values are mean with the SEM represented by vertical bars.