| Literature DB >> 27763537 |
Jie-Hua Chen1, Jia Song2, Yan Chen3, Qiang Ding4, Anfang Peng5, Limei Mao6.
Abstract
Vegan protein-based diet has attracted increasing interest in the prevention of metabolic syndrome (MetS). Meanwhile, adiponectin has become a highly potential molecular target in the prevention of MetS. Our study will identify a potential vegan protein diet for the prevention of MetS using rat models. Thirty-six Wistar rats were randomly assigned into three groups and given diets containing one of the following proteins for 12 weeks: casein (CAS, control diet), soy protein (SOY), and gluten-soy mixed protein (GSM). Changes in metabolic parameters as well as the expressions of adiponectin and its receptors were identified. Compared to CAS diet, both SOY and GSM diets led to decreases in blood total cholesterol and triglycerides, but only GSM diet led to an increase in HDL-cholesterol; no marked difference was observed in blood glucose in all three groups; HOMA-IR was found lower only in SOY group. Among groups, the order of serum adiponectin level was found as GSM > SOY > CAS. Similar order pattern was also observed in expression of adiponectin in adipose tissue and AdipoR1 mRNA in skeletal muscle. Our results suggested for the first time that, besides SOY diet, GSM diet could also be a possible substitute of animal protein to prevent MetS.Entities:
Keywords: adiponectin; dietary intervention; metabolic syndromes; rats; vegan protein
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27763537 PMCID: PMC5084030 DOI: 10.3390/nu8100643
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Composition of rat chow diet (g/kg).
| Components | CAS Group | SOY Group | GSM Group |
|---|---|---|---|
| Casein a (g) | 200.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Soy protein isolates b (g) | 0.0 | 400.0 | 200.0 |
| Wheat Gluten isolates c (g) | 0.0 | 0.0 | 142.8 |
| Vitamin mix ** (g) | 10.0 | 10.0 | 10.0 |
| Mineral mix ** (g) | 35.0 | 35.0 | 35.0 |
| Sucrose (g) | 50.0 | 50.0 | 50.0 |
| Corn starch (g) | 585.0 | 385.0 | 442.2 |
| Fiber (g) | 50.0 | 50.0 | 50.0 |
| Lipid (g) | 70.0 | 70.0 | 70.0 |
| Total amount (g) | 1000.0 | 1000.0 | 1000.0 |
** The composition of vitamin and mineral mix can be referred to AIN-93G; a Casein was purchased from Bodi Chemical Co., Ltd., Tianjin, China; b Soy protein isolates were purchased Qitian Biotechnology Co., Ltd., Anyang, China. Composition of soy protein isolates: protein 50%, carbohydrates and water 20%; c Whey Gluten isolates were purchased from Lianhua Gourmet Powder Co., Ltd., Henan, China. Composition of gluten isolates: protein 70%, carbohydrates and water 30%.
Primers used for PCR.
| Sense Primer | Antisense Primer | |
|---|---|---|
|
| 5′-TCACTCAGCATTCAGCGTAG-3′ | 5′-CTGATACTGGTCGTAGGTGAAG-3′ |
|
| 5′-ACTGGACTATTCAGGGATTGC-3′ | 5′-CCATAGAAGTGGACGAAAGC-3′ |
|
| 5′-TTGTGTATTCTTCCTGTGCC-3′ | 5′-CAGCACACAGATGACAATCA-3′ |
|
| 5′-CATCACTATCGGCAATGAGC-3′ | 5′-GACAGCACTGTGTTGGCATA-3′ |
Figure 1Weekly average feed intakes of three groups over the 12-week feeding period. Average feed intake of rats across all groups at the end of the study was statistically analyzed by one-way ANOVA followed by LSD-test and no significant difference was shown.
Figure 2Change of body weights of rats from three groups over the 12-week feeding period. Body weights of rats at the end of the study were statistically analyzed by one-way ANOVA followed by LSD-test; * p < 0.05 versus CAS and GSM group.
Fasting blood lipid, metabolic, and insulin responses in rats fed with different dietary proteins †,*.
| mmol/L | Insulin (IU/mL) | HOMA-IR # | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Triglyceride | Total Cholesterol | HDL-C | Glucose | |||
|
| ||||||
| CAS | 0.95 ± 0.28 | 1.99 ± 0.05 | 0.56 ± 0.11 | 7.54 ± 0.96 | 7.69 ± 1.79 | 2.56 ± 0.61 |
| SOY | 1.00 ± 0.21 | 2.14 ± 0.13 | 0.54 ± 0.10 | 7.53 ± 0.66 | 8.06 ± 1.66 | 2.37 ± 0.70 |
| GSM | 0.90 ± 0.19 | 2.14 ± 0.20 | 0.52 ± 0.07 | 7.07 ± 0.74 | 7.58 ± 1.99 | 2.39 ± 0.68 |
|
| ||||||
| CAS | 1.55 ± 0.23 | 2.20 ± 0.24 | 0.62 ± 0.05 | 4.55 ± 0.77 | 9.21 ± 1.57 | 1.83 ± 0.51 |
| SOY | 0.79 ± 0.33 a | 1.77 ± 0.38 a | 0.69 ± 0.08 | 4.37 ± 0.83 | 7.45 ± 1.92 a | 1.31 ± 0.42 a,c |
| GSM | 0.67 ± 0.24 a,b | 1.63 ± 0.49 a | 0.79 ± 0.06 a | 4.82 ± 0.65 | 8.23 ± 1.86 | 1.77 ± 0.57 |
|
| ||||||
| CAS | 48.7 ± 20.2 | 13.2 ± 10.2 | −9.5 ± 20.8 | −40.7 ± 15.0 | 16.4 ± 24.1 | −32.1 ± 19.5 |
| SOY | −19.5 ± 11.9 a | −15.0 ± 9.0 a | 19.5 ± 15.2 a | −39.7 ± 15.7 | −4.0 ± 23.6 | −42.3 ± 21.5 |
| GSM | −46.4 ± 16.9 a,b | −19.1 ± 11.8 a,b | 45.1 ± 18.1 a,b | −32.9 ± 11.2 | 16.1 ± 30.7 | −21.9 ± 26.5 |
† Abbreviations: CAS: casein; SOY: soy protein; GSM: gluten-soy mixed protein; HDL-C: high density lipoprotein cholesterol; * Blood samples were collected at the end of the study; Data was presented as arithmetic mean ±1 SD (n = 12 for each group); # HOMA-IR (Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance) = Fasting Blood Glucose (mmol/L) × Fasting Insulin (mIU/L)/22.5 [15]; † Change (%) = (12 week–0 weeks)/0 week × 100%; a p < 0.05 versus CAS group; b p < 0.05 versus SOY group; c p < 0.05 versus GSM group.
Figure 3The effect of different dietary proteins on serum adiponectin. Serum adiponectin showed no significant difference among all three groups at the beginning of the study. During the 12-week period, serum adiponectin in the CAS group decreased significantly whereas that in SOY and GSM group increased significantly as compared to their respective baseline levels. Among groups, SOY and GSM groups demonstrated higher levels of serum adiponectin than that of CAS group at the end of the study. One-way ANOVA followed by an LSD-test was used to detect significant differences of the means, ** p < 0.001 versus CAS group; # p < 0.05 versus baseline; ## p < 0.001 versus baseline.
Effect of different dietary proteins on visceral adipose tissue †.
| Group | Visceral Fat Mass (g) #, * | Visceral Fat Mass (%) *, Δ |
|---|---|---|
| CAS | 11.57 ± 1.67 | 2.62 ± 0.33 |
| SOY | 7.15 ± 1.71 a, b | 1.94 ± 0.46 a |
| GSM | 9.95 ± 1.08 | 2.13 ± 0.21 a |
† Abbreviations: CAS: casein; SOY: soy protein; GSM: gluten-soy mixed protein; * Data was presented as arithmetic mean ± 1 SD n = 12 for each group; # Visceral Fat Mass (g) = total perirenal adipose tissue (g) + total peri-epididymal adipose tissue (g) [16]; Δ Visceral fat mass (%) = Visceral fat mass/Body weight × 100; a p < 0.05 versus CAS group; b p < 0.05 versus GSM group.
Figure 4The effect of different dietary proteins on the expressions of adiponectin in adipose tissue, AdipoR1 in skeletal muscle and AdipoR2 in liver tissue. (A–C) demonstrate the expression levels (absorbance) of mRNA of adiponectin—AdipoR1 and AdipoR2—that were normalized against those of β-actin (served as a loading control). One-way ANOVA followed by LSD-test was used to detect significant differences of the means, * p < 0.05.
Figure 5The effect of different dietary proteins on the expression of adiponectin protein in epididymal adipose tissue. Protein levels of adiponectin were normalized against that of β-actin (served as a loading control). One-way ANOVA followed by LSD-test was used to detect significant differences of the means, * p < 0.05.