| Literature DB >> 31126082 |
Lene Secher Myrmel1, Kristin Røen Fauske2,3, Even Fjære4, Annette Bernhard5, Ulrike Liisberg6, Astrid Elise Hasselberg7, Jannike Øyen8, Karsten Kristiansen9, Lise Madsen10,11.
Abstract
Low-fat diets and energy restriction are recommended to prevent obesity and to induce weight loss, but high-protein diets are popular alternatives. However, the importance of the protein source in obesity prevention and weight loss is unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the ability of different animal protein sources to prevent or reverse obesity by using lean or obese C57BL/6J mice fed high-fat/high-protein or low-fat diets with casein, cod or pork as protein sources. Only the high-fat/high-protein casein-based diet completely prevented obesity development when fed to lean mice. In obese mice, ad libitum intake of a casein-based high-fat/high-protein diet modestly reduced body mass, whereas a pork-based high-fat/high-protein diet aggravated the obese state and reduced lean body mass. Caloric restriction of obese mice fed high-fat/high-protein diets reduced body weight and fat mass and improved glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity, irrespective of the protein source. Finally, in obese mice, ad libitum intake of a low-fat diet stabilized body weight, reduced fat mass and increased lean body mass, with the highest loss of fat mass found in mice fed the casein-based diet. Combined with caloric restriction, the casein-based low-fat diet resulted in the highest loss of fat mass. Overall, the dietary protein source has greater impact in obesity prevention than obesity reversal.Entities:
Keywords: diet; dietary protein source; glucose tolerance; insulin sensitivity; macronutrient composition; mice; obesity; weight loss
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31126082 PMCID: PMC6567247 DOI: 10.3390/nu11051153
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Dietary composition of the HF/HS 1 diet and the HF/HP 2 diets.
| Component (g/kg) | HF/HS | HF/HP Casein | HF/HP Cod | HF/HP Pork | LF 3 Casein | LF Cod | LF Pork |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Casein # | 69 | 416 | 207 | ||||
| Cod # | 67 | 431 | 215 | ||||
| Pork # | 73 | 461 | 217 | ||||
| Potato starch (dextrin) | 11 | 21 | 9,31 | 0 | 531 | 524 | 530 |
| Sucrose | 439 | 214 | 214 | 214 | 92 | 92 | 92 |
| Corn oil | 242 | 248 | 245 | 224 | 69 | 69 | 61 |
| Cellulose | 50 | 50 | 50 | 50 | 50 | 50 | 50 |
| 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.014 | |
| Mineral mix: SDS, AIN93Gminmix | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 |
| Vitamin mix: SDS, AIN93VX NCR95compliant | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Choline bitartrate | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 |
| L-Cystine | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Total | 1000 | 1000 | 1000 | 1000 | 1000 | 1000 | 1000 |
1 High-fat/high-sucrose (HF/HS), 2 high-fat/high-protein (HF/HP), 3 low-fat (LF) diets # added to the diets in amounts equal to 200 g crude protein/kg (33 E%) for the LF diets and 400 g crude protein/kg (16 E%) for the HF/HP diet. SDS—Special Diets Services.
Figure 1(a) Blood glucose levels during the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) performed in week 10 of feeding ad libitum high-fat/high-protein (HF/HP) diets based on different protein sources to lean mice, in addition to one group fed a low-fat (LF) diet and one fed a high-fat/high-sucrose (HF/HS) diet. (b) Area under the curve (AUC) for the OGTT. (c) Glucose levels during the insulin tolerance test (ITT) in week 11 and (d) the decremental area over the curve (AOC). (e) Body weight gain after 10 weeks, (f) fat mass and (g) lean mass in week 9 and (h) feed efficiency after 10 weeks. Data are presented as mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM) (n = 8–9) and different letters denote significant differences (P < 0.05) by one-way ANOVA using uncorrected Fisher’s Least Significant Difference (LSD) multiple comparison.
Figure 2(a) Body weight change, (b) fat mass change and (c) lean mass change after 6 weeks of feeding high-fat/high-protein (HF/HP) diets based on different protein sources ad libitum to already obese mice, in addition to one group fed the obesogenic high-fat/high-sucrose (HF/HS) diet. (d) Feed efficiency (g/MJ) from 6 weeks of HF/HP feeding. (e) Blood glucose levels during the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) performed in week 4 and (f) area under the curve (AUC) for the OGTT. (g) Blood glucose levels during the insulin tolerance test (ITT) in week 5 and (h) area over the curve (AOC) for the ITT. Data are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 9–12) and different letters denote significant differences (P < 0.05) by one-way ANOVA using uncorrected Fisher’s LSD multiple comparison.
Figure 3(a) Body weight change, (b) fat mass change and (c) lean mass change after 6 weeks of feeding high-fat/high-protein (HF/HP) diets based on different protein sources with 30 per cent calorie restriction (CR) to already obese mice, in addition to one group fed the obesogenic high-fat/high-sucrose (HF/HS) diet ad libitum. (d) Feed efficiency (g/MJ) from 6 weeks of HF/HP feeding. (e) Blood glucose levels during the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) performed in week 4 and (f) area under the curve (AUC) for the OGTT. (g) Blood glucose levels during the insulin tolerance test (ITT) in week 5 and (h) area over the curve (AOC) for the ITT. Data are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 9–13) and different letters denote significant differences (P < 0.05) by one-way ANOVA using uncorrected Fisher’s LSD multiple comparison.
Figure 4(a) Body weight change, (b) fat mass change and (c) lean mass change after 6 weeks of feeding low-fat (LF) diets based on different protein sources ad libitum to already obese mice, in addition to one group fed the obesogenic very high-fat (VHF) diet ad libitum. (d) Feed efficiency (g/MJ) from 6 weeks of LF feeding. (e) Body weight change, (f) fat mass change and (g) lean mass change after 6 weeks of feeding LF diets based on different protein sources with 30 per cent calorie restriction (CR) to already obese mice, in addition to one group fed the obesogenic VHF diet ad libitum. (h) Feed efficiency (g/MJ) from 6 weeks of LF feeding. Data are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 9–13) and different letters denote significant differences (P < 0.05) by one-way ANOVA using uncorrected Fisher’s LSD multiple comparison.
Figure 5(a) Blood glucose levels during the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) performed in week 4 of feeding low-fat (LF) diets based on different protein sources ad libitum to already obese mice, in addition to one group fed the obesogenic very high-fat (VHF) diet ad libitum. (b) Area under the curve (AUC) for the OGTT. (c) Glucose levels during the insulin tolerance test (ITT) in week 5 and (d) the decremental area over the curve (AOC). (e) Blood glucose levels during the OGTT performed in week 4 feeding LF diets based on different protein sources with 30 percent calorie restriction (CR) to already obese mice, in addition to one group fed the obesogenic VHF diet ad libitum. (f) AUC for the OGTT. (g) Glucose levels during the ITT in week 5 and (h) the decremental AOC. Data are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 9–13) and different letters denote significant differences (P < 0.05) by one-way ANOVA using uncorrected Fisher’s LSD multiple comparison.