| Literature DB >> 23529076 |
Emily R Bovier1, Richard D Lewis, Billy R Hammond.
Abstract
The objective of this project was to investigate the relationships between total and regional distribution of body fat and tissue lutein (L) and zeaxanthin (Z) status. Healthy men and women (N = 100; average age: 22.5 year, average BMI: 23.4 kg/m2) were evaluated. Total body and regional fat mass were assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (Hologic Delphi A). Serum LZ was measured using reverse phase high-performance liquid chromatography, and retinal LZ (referred to as macular pigment optical density; MPOD) was measured using heterochromatic flicker photometry. Body fat percentage (total and regional) was inversely related to MPOD (p < 0.01) but no significant relationship was found for serum LZ. Higher body fat percentage, even within relatively healthy limits, is associated with lower tissue LZ status. The results indicate that adiposity may affect the nutritional state of the retina. Such links may be one of the reasons that obesity promotes age-related degenerative conditions of the retina.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23529076 PMCID: PMC3705317 DOI: 10.3390/nu5030750
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Means and standard deviations for body composition variables and LZ status.
| Entire Sample ( | Males ( | Females ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Total Body | 25.79 ± 7.60 | 18.90 ± 4.89 | 30.19 ± 5.45 |
| Leg | 30.05 ± 8.98 | 20.72 ± 4.86 | 36.01 ± 5.03 |
| Trunk | 23.12 ± 7.95 | 17.81 ± 6.15 | 26.51 ± 7.09 |
| Arm | 26.15 ± 9.80 | 16.44 ± 4.47 | 32.35 ± 6.75 |
| Trunk Fat (Relative) a | 44.86 ± 6.35 | 47.52 ± 6.41 | 43.17 ± 5.76 |
|
| |||
| Total Body | 65,346 ± 13,345 | 72,423 ± 12,516 | 60,790 ± 11,853 |
| Fat-Free Soft Tissue | 48,796 ± 10,413 | 58,980 ± 7291 | 42,284 ± 5891 |
| Total Body Fat | 17,062 ± 7090 | 13,847 ± 6062 | 19,132 ± 6972 |
|
| |||
| MPOD 15′ | 0.53 ± 0.21 | 0.55 ± 0.20 | 0.52 ± 0.22 |
| MPOD 30′ | 0.43 ± 0.18 | 0.45 ± 0.17 | 0.42 ± 0.19 |
| MPOD 60′ | 0.29 ± 0.14 | 0.29 ± 0.13 | 0.29 ± 0.14 |
| MPOD 105′ | 0.13 ± 0.09 | 0.14 ± 0.09 | 0.12 ± 0.09 |
| Serum LZ b | 0.26 ± 0.12 | 0.21 ± 0.07 | 0.28 ± 0.14 |
a Refers to the percentage of total body fat in the trunk region; b N = 65 (39 Females, 26 Males).
Figure 1The relationship between MPOD at 30'eccentricity and total body fat percentage.
Pearson-product moment correlation coefficients for associations between body fat percentage and LZ status.
| Body Fat Percentage | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Leg | Trunk | Arm | Trunk (Relative) a | |
| MPOD 15′ | −0.26 * | −0.18 | −0.28 ** | −0.25 * | −0.10 |
| MPOD 30′ | −0.32 ** | −0.22 * | −0.37 ** | −0.30 ** | −0.20 * |
| MPOD 60′ | −0.24 * | −0.14 | −0.31 ** | −0.21 * | −0.23 * |
| MPOD 105′ | −0.29 ** | −0.20 * | −0.32 ** | −0.28 ** | −0.16 |
| Serum LZ | 0.16 | 0.15 | 0.16 | 0.11 | −0.02 |
** p < 0.01; * p < 0.05; a Refers to the percentage of total body fat in the trunk region.
Figure 2The relationship between MPOD at 30' eccentricity and the percentage of total body fat that accumulated in the trunk region for male (N = 39) and female (N = 61) subjects.