| Literature DB >> 26912252 |
Jing Han1,2, Longlong Li1, Dian Wang1, Haitian Ma3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chicken as a delicious food for a long history, and it is well known that excess fat deposition in broiler chickens will not only induced metabolic diseases, but also lead to adverse effect in the consumer's health. (-)-Hydroxycitric acid (HCA), a major active ingredient of Garcinia Cambogia extracts, had shown to suppress fat accumulation in animals and humans. While, the precise physiological mechanism of HCA has not yet been full clarified, especially its action in broiler chickens. Thus, this study aimed to assess the effect of (-)-HCA on lipid metabolism in broiler chickens.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26912252 PMCID: PMC4765117 DOI: 10.1186/s12944-016-0208-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Lipids Health Dis ISSN: 1476-511X Impact factor: 3.876
Effect of (−)-HCA on growth performance of broiler chickens from 22 to 49d of agea
| Itemb | Supplemental (−)-HCA (mg/kg) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1000 | 2000 | 3000 | |
| BW (g per birds) | 3460.23 ± 49.22 | 3360.03 ± 52.04 | 3337.23 ± 42.53* | 3312.83 ± 28.09* |
| ADG (g per birds per d) | 86.51 ± 1.36 | 83.51 ± 1.44 | 82.83 ± 1.16* | 82.10 ± 0.73* |
| ADFI (g per birds per d) | 177.95 ± 6.92 | 174.48 ± 7.28 | 164.22 ± 6.58 | 171.57 ± 7.19 |
| Feed conversion ratio (g :g) | 2.06 ± 0.08 | 2.09 ± 0.09 | 1.98 ± 0.08 | 2.09 ± 0.09 |
a BW = body weight; ADG = average daily gain; ADFI = average daily feed intake
b Data in each group represent mean values of three replicates, one replicate indicating the average of 25 chickens in one cage. Values are means ± SE. * P < 0.05, compared with the control group
Effect of (−)-HCA on carcass composition in broiler chickens
| Item | Supplemental (−)-HCA (mg/kg) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1000 | 2000 | 3000 | |
| Absolute abdominal fat (g) | 103.39 ± 4.62 | 95.66 ± 6.60 | 94.55 ± 5.12 | 92.33 ± 4.41 |
| Relative abdominal fat (%) | 2.97 ± 0.12 | 2.80 ± 0.20 | 2.90 ± 0.15 | 2.90 ± 0.14 |
| Absolute liver weight (g) | 57.57 ± 3.03 | 55.52 ± 1.55 | 50.01 ± 1.2* | 48.94 ± 2.21* |
| Relative liver weight (%) | 1.65 ± 0.07 | 1.65 ± 0.04 | 1.57 ± 0.04 | 1.47 ± 0.04* |
| Relative pectoral weigh (%) | 13.88 ± 0.19 | 14.09 ± 0.24 | 13.93 ± 0.11 | 13.49 ± 0.18 |
| Relative leg weight (%) | 8.50 ± 0.19 | 8.39 ± 0.07 | 8.57 ± 0.10 | 8.63 ± 0.12 |
Values are means ± SE. Each (−)-HCA treated group represent 12 chickens at the age of 49 days, * P < 0.05, compared with the control group
Effect of (−)-HCA on serum lipid parameters in broiler chickens
| Item | Supplemental (−)-HCA (mg/kg) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1000 | 2000 | 3000 | |
| TC (mmol/L) | 3.66 ± 0.08 | 3.83 ± 0.22 | 3.42 ± 0.22 | 3.22 ± 0.14 |
| TG (mmol/L) | 0.56 ± 0.04 | 0.51 ± 0.04 | 0.48 ± 0.03 | 0.19 ± 0.01** |
| LDL-C (mmol/L) | 0.87 ± 0.13 | 0.8 ± 0.1 | 0.72 ± 0.15 | 0.46 ± 0.06* |
| HDL-C (mmol/L) | 1.72 ± 0.09 | 1.69 ± 0.07 | 1.68 ± 0.07 | 1.87 ± 0.10 |
| NEFA (μmol/L) | 1401.43 ± 110.94 | 1267.83 ± 77.74 | 1390.03 ± 141.97 | 1437.93 ± 56.08 |
Values are means ± SE. Each (−)-HCA treated group represent 12 chickens at the age of 49 days. * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01 compared with the control group
Effect of (−)-HCA on liver homogenates concentration of triglycerides (TG), hepatic lipase (HL), non-esterified fatty acid (NEFA)
| Item | Supplemental (−)-HCA (mg/kg) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1000 | 2000 | 3000 | |
| TG (mmol/g liver) | 3.31 ± 0.56 | 2.78 ± 0.40 | 2.75 ± 0.58 | 2.02 ± 0.34* |
| NEFA (μmol/L) | 65.83 ± 5.66 | 95.41 ± 9.52 | 109.90 ± 19.21* | 125.52 ± 12.37** |
| HL (U/mL) | 1.57 ± 0.11 | 1.59 ± 0.09 | 3.41 ± 0.27** | 2.68 ± 0.28** |
| Hepatic glycogen (mg/g liver) | 2.63 ± 0.23 | 3.63 ± 0.34 | 3.91 ± 0.41* | 3.91 ± 0.65* |
Values are means ± SE. Each (−)-HCA treated group represent 12 chickens at the age of 49 days. * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01 compared with the control group
Effect of (−)-HCA on serum metabolic hormones in broiler chickens
| Item | Supplemental (−)-HCA (mg/kg) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1000 | 2000 | 3000 | |
| Insulin (pg/mL) | 13.17 ± 0.87 | 12.85 ± 0.47 | 11.56 ± 1.03 | 13.05 ± 0.74 |
| Glucagon (pg/mL) | 496.56 ± 24.57 | 422.86 ± 21.10 | 484.43 ± 25.02 | 464.29 ± 47.38 |
| T3 (ng/mL) | 1.19 ± 0.05 | 1.21 ± 0.05 | 1.13 ± 0.06 | 1.37 ± 0.14 |
| T4 (ng/mL) | 42.82 ± 0.92 | 42.25 ± 1.58 | 42.54 ± 1.25 | 47.65 ± 1.53* |
| FT3 (fmol/ml) | 2.04 ± 0.15 | 1.98 ± 0.12 | 2.16 ± 0.21 | 3.33 ± 0.65* |
| FT4 (fmol/ml) | 6.41 ± 0.21 | 6.86 ± 0.27 | 6.31 ± 0.25 | 6.70 ± 0.26 |
Values are means ± SE. Each (−)-HCA treated group represent 12 chickens at the age of 49 days. * P < 0.05 compared with the control group
Fig. 1Effect of (−)-HCA on (a) ACC, (b) FAS, (c) ACLY and (d) SREBP-1c mRNA levels in the liver of broiler chickens. Values are means ± SE. (12 chickens per treatment are representative of four birds per replicate). * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01 compared with the value of 0 mg of (−)-HCA/kg group
Fig. 2Effect of (−)-HCA on (a) CPT-I and (b) PPARα mRNA levels in the liver of broiler chickens. Values are means ± SE. (12 chickens per treatment are representative of four birds per replicate). * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01 compared with the value of 0 mg of (−)-HCA/kg group
Fig. 3Effect of (−)-HCA on (a) AMPKα1, (b) AMPKβ1, (c) AMPKβ2 and (d) AMPKγ1 mRNA levels in the liver of broiler chickens. Values are means ± SE. (12 chickens per treatment are representative of four birds per replicate). * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01 compared with the value of 0 mg of (−)-HCA/kg group
Fig. 4Mechanism of (−)-HCA effect on hepatic lipids metabolism. Supplemental (−)-HCA inhibited lipogenesis by inhibiting ACLY, SREBP-1c and FAS expression, and accelerated lipolysis through enhancing HL activity and PPARα expression, which eventually led to reduced abdominal fat deposition in broiler chickens. The variance of gene expression which involved in lipid metabolism might associate with the mechanism of how (−)-HCA reduced the accumulation of fat in broiler chickens
Composition and nutrient levels of the experimental diets
| Item | Starter | Finisher |
|---|---|---|
| Ingredient (%) | ||
| Corn | 52.6 | 57..4 |
| Wheat bran | 2.0 | 4.0 |
| Soybean meal | 31.1 | 27.0 |
| Fish meal | 6.0 | 3.0 |
| Calcium phosphate | 1.0 | 1.5 |
| Limestone | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| DL-Methionine | 0.3 | 0.1 |
| Vitamin-mineral premixa | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| Rapeseed oil | 5.0 | 5.0 |
| NaCl | 0.3 | 0.3 |
| Nutrient composition Calculated | ||
| MEb (kcal/kg) | 3.10 | 3.14 |
| CP (%) | 22.52 | 19.74 |
| Lys (%) | 1.19 | 1.08 |
| Met + cystine (%) | 0.93 | 0.71 |
| Ca (%) | 1.00 | 0.9 |
| Total P (%) | 0.80 | 0.76 |
| Available P (%) | 0.47 | 0.39 |
Nutrient level of the diets was based on National Research Council recommendations
aVitamin–mineral premix supplied the following per kilogram of diet: vitamin A, 1500 IU; vitamin D3, 200 IU; vitamin E, 10 mg; vitamin K3, 0.5 mg; thiamine, 1.8 mg; riboflavin, 3.6 mg; D-pantothenic acid, 10 mg; folic acid, 0.55 mg; pyridoxine, 3.5 mg; niacin, 35 mg; cobalamin, 0.01 mg; biotin, 0.15 mg; Fe, 80 mg; Cu, 8 mg; Mn, 60 mg; Zn, 40 mg; I, 0.35 mg; and Se, 0.15 mg
bME = metabolizable energy
Prime sequence of targeted genes and β-actin
| Gene | GenBank acession | Primer sequences (5′–3′) | Orientation | Product size (bp) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| β-actin | L08165 | TGCGTGACATCAAGGAGAAG | Forward | 300 |
| ACC | J03541 | GTTGTGGTTGGCAGAGCAAG | Forward | 284 |
| CPT-I | AY675193 | GGGTTGCCCTTATCGTCACA | Forward | 151 |
| FAS | NM205155 | TGAAGGACCTTATCGCATTGC | Forward | 96 |
| SREBP-1c | AY029224 | GTCGGCGATCCTGAGGAA | Forward | 105 |
| ACLY | AJ851548 | CACCCAGAGGTGGATGTTCT | Forward | 188 |
| PPARα | AF470455 | CAAACCAACCATCCTGACGAT | Forward | 64 |
| AMPKα1 | DQ302133 | CAAGTAGTGTCTCGCACGGT | Forward | 133 |
| AMPKβ1 | DQ398947 | CACCAAGGATGGGGACAGAC | Forward | 127 |
| AMPKβ2 | DQ640761 | ACACTGCCTTCTTCTCCCTC | Forward | 195 |
| AMPKγ1 | DQ133598 | AGGACTCCTTCAAGCCGTTG | Forward | 196 |