| Literature DB >> 26679101 |
Chong Yew Tan1, Samuel Virtue1, Steven Murfitt2, Lee D Roberts, Lee D Robert2,3, Yi Hui Phua2, Martin Dale1, Julian L Griffin2,3, Francisco Tinahones4, Philipp E Scherer5, Antonio Vidal-Puig1,6.
Abstract
The non-essential fatty acids, C18:1n9, C16:0, C16:1n7, C18:0 and C18:1n7 account for over 75% of fatty acids in white adipose (WAT) triacylglycerol (TAG). The relative composition of these fatty acids (FA) is influenced by the desaturases, SCD1-4 and the elongase, ELOVL6. In knock-out models, loss of SCD1 or ELOVL6 results in reduced Δ9 desaturated and reduced 18-carbon non-essential FA respectively. Both Elovl6 KO and SCD1 KO mice exhibit improved insulin sensitivity. Here we describe the relationship between WAT TAG composition in obese mouse models and obese humans stratified for insulin resistance. In mouse models with increasing obesity and insulin resistance, there was an increase in scWAT Δ9 desaturated FAs (SCD ratio) and FAs with 18-carbons (Elovl6 ratio) in mice. Data from mouse models discordant for obesity and insulin resistance (AKT2 KO, Adiponectin aP2-transgenic), suggested that scWAT TAG Elovl6 ratio was associated with insulin sensitivity, whereas SCD1 ratio was associated with fat mass. In humans, a greater SCD1 and Elovl6 ratio was found in metabolically more harmful visceral adipose tissue when compared to subcutaneous adipose tissue.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26679101 PMCID: PMC4683622 DOI: 10.1038/srep18366
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1(A) Equations for Elovl6 and SCD activity ratios. (B) FAME composition in molar percentage in order of increasing chain length and desaturation and classified as non-essential or essential fatty acids. n3 and n6 denotes omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids respectively. ScWAT FAME composition from 4 month old male C57BL/6 mice (n = 7), ob/ob mice (n = 8) and chow pellets. (C) Calculated Elovl6 and SCD ratio from data shown in (B). (D) Composition of scWAT classified by fatty acid type from data shown in (B). (E) Elovl6 and SCD ratios for ob/ob and Ad-TG ob/ob scWAT samples (n = 5 per group). (F) Composition of ob/ob and Ad-TG ob/ob scWAT lipids classified by fatty acid type. All error bars are 1 S.E.M. Abbreviations: odd chain (Odd) Essential fatty acids (Ess) Non-essential fatty acids excluding C16 and C18 species (Non Ess) and C16 and C18 non-essential fatty acids (16&18C). (A) P < 0.05 between genotypes, (B) P < 0.05 between chow fed and chow diet, (C) P < 0.05 between ob/ob and chow diet.
Figure 2(A) Composition of scWAT lipids, classified by fatty acid type for WT or AKT2 KO mice on chow or HFD for 4 months post weaning (B) Calculated Elovl6 and SCD ratios for WT or AKT2 KO mice on chow or HFD 4 months post weaning. (C) Description of mouse dietary regimes, body weights and blood glucoses. (D) Composition of scWAT lipids, classified by fatty acid type for mice on chow and HFD for 0, 1 or 3 months compared with chow and high-fat diet pellets. (E) Calculated Elovl6 and SCD ratios for mice on HFD for 0, 1 or 3 months. (F) Composition of scWAT lipids classified by fatty acid type for mice on chow or HFD for 0 or 5 months compared with chow and high-fat diet pellets. (G) Calculated Elovl6 and SCD ratios for mice on HFD for 0 or 5 months. Error bars indicate 1 S.E.M. (A) p(A) < 0.05, compared to 0m-HFD fed mice based on t-test (B) p < 0.05, compared to 5m-Chow mice based on t-test. *p < 0.05 based on t-test.
Subject characteristics of morbidly obese individuals undergoing elective bariatric surgery.
| Sensitive | Resistant | p value | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | Female | Male | Female | Group | Gender | |
| N | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | – | – |
| Age (yrs) | 39.9 ± 4.2 | 48.4 ± 4.8 | 35.7 ± 3.5 | 42.2 ± 3.1 | 0.212 | 0.061 |
| Weight (Kg) | 166.3 ±9.5 | 140.4 ± 6.7 | 172.4 ± 9.3 | 145.6 ± 7.1 | 0.659 | |
| Height (cm) | 168.7 ± 2.1 | 159.4 ± 1.9 | 174.9 ± 2.3 | 158.4 ± 3.5 | 0.386 | |
| BMI | 58.3 ± 2.5 | 55.1 ± 1.9 | 56.3 ± 2.7 | 57.9 ± 1.0 | 0.850 | 0.467 |
| Insulin (pmol/l) | 16.8 ± 2.4 | 14.0 ± 1.2 | 43.1 ± 4.3 | 53.5 ± 4.6 | 0.742 | |
| Glucose (mmol/l) | 5.3 ± 0.4 | 5.4 ± 0.2 | 5.7 ± 0.2 | 6.4 ± 0.6 | 0.160 | |
| HOMAIR | 3.9 ± 0.5 | 3.3 ± 0.3 | 10.7 ± 1.1 | 15.3 ± 2.5 | 0.423 | |
| Cholesterol (mmol/l) | 4.9 ± 0.3 | 5.0 ± 0.4 | 4.3 ± 0.3 | 5.6 ± 0.2 | 0.948 | |
| Triglyceride (mmol/l) | 1.2 ± 0.2 | 1.3 ± 0.2 | 1.5 ± 0.4 | 1.9 ± 0.4 | 0.274 | 0.655 |
| HDL-Chol (mmol/l) | 1.0 ± 0.1 | 1.3 ± 0.1 | 0.8 ± 0.1 | 1.4 ± 0.1 | 0.380 | |
| NEFA (mmol/l) | 0.6 ± 0.1 | 0.7 ± 0.1 | 0.7 ± 0.1 | 0.6 ± 0.0 | 0.892 | 0.800 |
p values following 2 factor ANOVA with Group (Insulin sensitive or resistant) and gender as independent factors. Insulin sensitivity was defined as having HOMA-IR within 2 standard deviation of a lean healthy population. Values are mean +/−1 S.E.M.
Figure 3(A) Table showing p-values from mixed model ANOVA using WAT depot as within subject factor with gender and insulin sensitivity as between subject factors. (B) Elovl6 ratios for subjects stratified by gender and insulin resistance status for visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue. (C) SCD ratios for subjects stratified by gender and insulin resistance status for visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue. Values are mean +/− 1 S.E.M.
Figure 4(A) Liver triglyceride and chow diet fatty acid profiles (B) Liver TG and chow diet Elovl6 and SCD1 ratios (C) Liver TG and chow diet indices of DNL (D) Gene expression from liver (E) Gene expression from scWAT. (F) Summary figure highlighting changes in enzymes and their products in liver and adipose tissue in lean and obese states. Boxes represent enzyme expression levels, ovals represent enzyme products. Red boxes represent upregulation, blue represent down regulation and grey represent baseline levels of expression and concentration. (A) P < 0.05 between genotypes, (B) P < 0.05 between chow fed and chow diet, (C) P < 0.05 between ob/ob and chow diet. *P < 0.05. Values are mean +/−1 S.E.M.