| Literature DB >> 26870719 |
Austin T Mudd1, Lindsey S Alexander2, Kirsten Berding3, Rosaline V Waworuntu4, Brian M Berg5, Sharon M Donovan3, Ryan N Dilger6.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Milk fat globule membrane (MFGM) and lactoferrin have been identified as two components that have potential to affect neurodevelopment. While concentrations of some MFGM constituents in infant formulas are within human milk range, they may not be present at optimal or clinically effective levels. However, lactoferrin levels of infant formulas are consistently reported to be lower than human milk. This study sought to provide a novel combination of prebiotics, bovine-derived MFGM, and lactoferrin and assess their influence on neurodevelopment.Entities:
Keywords: brain; internal capsule; lactoferrin; milk fat globule membrane; neurodevelopment; nutrition; pig; prebiotics
Year: 2016 PMID: 26870719 PMCID: PMC4740374 DOI: 10.3389/fped.2016.00004
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pediatr ISSN: 2296-2360 Impact factor: 3.418
Figure 1Spatial T-maze behavioral assessment revealed differences due to diet in latency to choice, on three separate days. (A) Behavior performance was assessed by proportion of correct choices, out of 10 trials, per day. No differences were observed between dietary treatments. (B) Analysis of latency to choice revealed differences (P < 0.05) on day 2 of acquisition and days 3 and 4 of reversal, in all cases TEST piglets exhibited longer latencies compared with CONT piglets on these days.
Voxel-based morphometry.
| Tissue | Comparison | Anatomic region | Cluster | Peak level | Local maxima coordinates | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (# voxels) | Pseudo- | |||||||
| Gray | CONT > TEST | Cerebellum | 147 | 0.004 | 3.40 | 0 | −18 | 2 |
| Cerebellum | 41 | 0.010 | 2.89 | 10 | −19 | 1 | ||
| Left cortex | 547 | 0.006 | 3.41 | −10 | 20 | 6 | ||
| Left cortex | 173 | 0.010 | 3.06 | −11 | 20 | 16 | ||
| Left cortex | 149 | 0.005 | 2.44 | −18 | 13 | 10 | ||
| Left cortex | 129 | 0.008 | 2.27 | −6 | 36 | 3 | ||
| Right cortex | 1051 | < 0.001 | 6.28 | 15 | 13 | 16 | ||
| Right cortex | 371 | 0.009 | 3.81 | 20 | −3 | 10 | ||
| Right cortex | 86 | 0.003 | 3.29 | 11 | 23 | 14 | ||
| Right cortex | 42 | 0.007 | 2.82 | 8 | 29 | 7 | ||
| TEST > CONT | Caudate | 40 | 0.006 | 1.56 | 6 | 15 | 8 | |
| Cerebellum | 26 | 0.009 | 3.01 | 3 | −24 | 3 | ||
| Cerebral aqueduct | 26 | 0.010 | 2.50 | 1 | −2 | −2 | ||
| Left cortex | 392 | 0.005 | 4.12 | −11 | 9 | 1 | ||
| Left cortex | 299 | 0.010 | 3.96 | −17 | −6 | 2 | ||
| Midbrain | 34 | 0.010 | 2.13 | −6 | −6 | −8 | ||
| Right cortex | 37 | 0.009 | 1.77 | 17 | −9 | −4 | ||
| White | CONT > TEST | Cerebellum | 254 | 0.009 | 3.61 | −1 | −20 | −1 |
| Left cortex | 143 | 0.009 | 3.62 | −15 | 1 | 15 | ||
| Left cortex | 480 | 0.007 | 3.45 | −10 | 35 | 5 | ||
| Left cortex | 62 | 0.010 | 2.80 | −9 | 6 | 13 | ||
| Left Hippocampus | 100 | 0.009 | 1.25 | −12 | −2 | −4 | ||
| Medulla | 712 | 0.006 | 3.66 | −6 | −15 | −14 | ||
| Right cortex | 1026 | 0.001 | 7.10 | 14 | 13 | 15 | ||
| Right cortex | 151 | 0.001 | 4.57 | 9 | 22 | 13 | ||
| Right cortex | 175 | 0.006 | 4.12 | 10 | 35 | 5 | ||
| Right cortex | 183 | 0.009 | 4.02 | 15 | 1 | 12 | ||
| Right cortex | 70 | 0.008 | 1.23 | 9 | 27 | 0 | ||
| TEST > CONT | Cerebellum | 29 | 0.009 | 1.88 | −4 | −16 | 3 | |
| Lateral Ventricle | 21 | 0.010 | 2.18 | 4 | 20 | 8 | ||
| Right cortex | 203 | 0.009 | 1.19 | 18 | −8 | 6 | ||
.
.
.
Figure 2Voxel-based morphometry heat maps illustrating tissue concentration differences between TEST- and CONT-fed piglets. The color bar indicates pseudo-t statistics, used to determine the P-uncorrected statistics listed in Table 1. (A) Gray matter tissue differences in which CONT piglets have more gray matter than TEST piglets. (B) Gray matter tissue differences in which TEST piglets have more gray matter than CONT piglets. (C) White matter tissue differences in which CONT piglets have more white matter than TEST piglets. Illustration for white matter differences where TEST piglets have more white matter than CONT, not shown.
Figure 3Radial and mean diffusivity indicate greater maturation in the internal capsule of TEST-fed piglets compared with CONT. (A) Radial diffusivity measures revealed CONT piglets had higher (P = 0.032) rates of diffusion compared with TEST piglets. (B) Mean diffusivity measures revealed CONT piglets had higher (P = 0.028) rates of diffusion compared with TEST piglets. * denotes significant (P < 0.05) difference between TEST and CONT piglets.