| Literature DB >> 31887996 |
Zenghao Yan1, Hao Wu1, Hongliang Yao1,2,3, Wenjun Pan1, Minmin Su1, Taobin Chen1,2, Weiwei Su1, Yonggang Wang1.
Abstract
Rotundic acid (RA) is a major triterpene constituent in the barks of Ilex rotunda Thunb, which have been widely used to make herbal tea for health care in southern China. RA has a variety of bioactivities such as anti-inflammation and lipid-lowering effect. However, little is known about the effects and mechanisms of RA on metabolic disturbance in type 2 diabetes (T2D) and its effect on gut microbiota. A T2D rat model induced by high fat diet (HFD) feeding and low-dose streptozotocin (STZ) injection was employed and RA showed multipronged effects on T2D and its complications, including improving glucolipid metabolism, lowering blood pressure, protecting against cardiovascular and hepatorenal injuries, and alleviating oxidative stress and inflammation. Furthermore, 16s rRNA gene sequencing was carried out on an Illumina HiSeq 2500 platform and RA treatment could restore the gut microbial dysbiosis in T2D rats to a certain extent. RA treatment significantly enhanced the richness and diversity of gut microbiota. At the genus level, beneficial or commensal bacteria Prevotella, Ruminococcus, Leuconostoc and Streptococcus were significantly increased by RA treatment, while RA-treated rats had a lower abundance of opportunistic pathogen Klebsiella and Proteus. Spearman's correlation analysis showed that the abundances of these bacteria were strongly correlated with various biochemical parameters, suggesting that the improvement of gut microbiota might help to prevent or attenuate T2D and its complication. In conclusion, our findings support RA as a nutraceutical agent or plant foods rich in this compound might be helpful for the alleviation of T2D and its complications through improving gut microbiota.Entities:
Keywords: diabetic complications; gut microbiota; metabolic disturbance; rotundic acid; type 2 diabetes
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31887996 PMCID: PMC7019423 DOI: 10.3390/nu12010067
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Figure 1Effects of rotundic acid (RA) on body weight, water intake, food intake and glucose metabolism (glucose (GLU), HbAc1, insulin (INS), the HOMA-IR index, the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), the area under the curve (AUC) of the OGTT, the insulin tolerance test (ITT) and the AUC of the ITT). Data were presented as the mean ± SD (n = 8 per group). * p < 0.05 vs. control group; ** p < 0.01 vs. control group; # p < 0.05 vs. T2D model group; ## p < 0.01 vs. T2D model group by Tukey’s multiple comparison test.
Figure 2Effects of RA on lipid metabolism (total glyceride (TG), total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and free fatty acids (FFAs)) and blood pressure (angiotensin-2 (ANG-2), systolic blood pressure (SYS), diastolic blood pressure (DIA) and mean arterial pressure (MAP)). Data were presented as the mean ± SD (n = 8 per group). ** p < 0.01 vs. control group; # p < 0.05 vs. T2D model group; ## p < 0.01 vs. T2D model group by Tukey’s multiple comparison test.
Serum myocardial enzymes (α-HBDH, CK, CK-MB and LDH), CRP and ET-1 levels of the control group, T2D model group and RA-treated group (40 mg/kg/day) at the end of the experiment.
| Control | T2D Model | RA-Treated | |
|---|---|---|---|
| α-HBDH (U/L) | 104.8 ± 12.5 | 525.1 ± 37.1 ** | 151.9 ± 19.6 ## |
| CK (U/L) | 0.230 ± 0.028 | 0.712 ± 0.095 ** | 0.418 ± 0.090 ## |
| CK-MB (U/L) | 164.9 ± 12.5 | 474.5 ± 45.2 ** | 191.7 ± 27.9 ## |
| LDH (U/L) | 1405.7 ± 175.0 | 2352.1 ± 148.1 ** | 1854.0 ± 163.8 ## |
| CRP (pg/mL) | 305.3 ± 32.2 | 647.3 ± 29.6 ** | 422.7 ± 46.2 ## |
| ET-1 (pg/mL) | 33.1 ± 5.9 | 61.5 ± 3.3 ** | 48.9 ± 12.7 # |
| ALT (IU/L) | 22.7 ± 9.2 | 111.7 ± 18.3 ** | 44.6 ± 13.4 ## |
| AST (IU/L) | 92.5 ± 13.4 | 174.7 ± 23.8 ** | 99.32 ± 12.6 ## |
| ALP (KU/100 mL) | 11.4 ± 2.3 | 53.4 ± 4.2 ** | 15.1 ± 3.0 ## |
| UA (μmol/L) | 66.2 ± 16.0 | 208.9 ± 35.2 ** | 131.0 ± 38.4 ## |
| BUN (mmol/L) | 4.9 ± 0.7 | 10.8 ± 1.3 ** | 5.3 ± 1.1 ## |
| CRE (μmol/L) | 42.2 ± 7.0 | 62.6 ± 12.6 ** | 52.9 ± 4.6 |
Data are present as the mean ± SD, n = 8. ** p < 0.01 vs. control group; # p < 0.05 vs. T2D model group; ## p < 0.01 vs. T2D model group by Tukey’s multiple comparison test.
Oxidative stress factors (SOD, MDA) and cytokines (TNF-α, INF-γ, IL-1β, IL-4, and IL-6) of the control group, T2D model group and RA-treated group (40 mg/kg/day) at the end of the experiment.
| Control | T2D Model | RA-Treated | |
|---|---|---|---|
| SOD (U/L) | 269.2 ± 20.5 | 216.3 ± 19.6 ** | 246.7 ± 10.6 ## |
| MDA (nmol/mL) | 4.29 ± 0.63 | 6.20 ± 0.59 ** | 4.73 ± 0.93 ## |
| TNF-α (pg/mL) | 234.9 ± 23.4 | 566.5 ± 72.6 ** | 259.1 ± 43.2 ## |
| INF-γ (pg/mL) | 18.9 ± 3.9 | 23.0 ± 4.1 | 16.6 ± 1.7 ## |
| IL-1β (pg/mL) | 9.6 ± 3.0 | 19.0 ± 2.7 ** | 11.0 ± 1.7 ## |
| IL-4 (pg/mL) | 54.0 ± 5.9 | 37.1 ± 4.0 ** | 55.2 ± 10.6 ## |
| IL-6 (pg/mL) | 6.5 ± 1.2 | 14.4 ± 2.5 ** | 8.7 ± 1.7 ## |
Data are present as the mean ± SD, n = 8. ** p < 0.01 vs. control group; ## p < 0.01 vs. T2D model group by Tukey’s multiple comparison test.
Figure 3(a) The α-diversity of the Chao1 value and Shannon value for the control, T2D model and RA-treated groups. * p < 0.05 vs. control group; ** p < 0.01 vs. control group; # p < 0.05 vs. T2D model group by the Kruskal–Wallis test. (b) Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) based on weighted unifrac metrics of the microbial community for the control, T2D model and RA-treated groups.
Figure 4(a) Composition analysis of gut microbiota at the phylum level in the control, T2D model and RA-treated groups. (b) Relative abundances of gut microbiota at the genus level in the control, T2D model and RA-treated groups. * p < 0.05 vs. control group; ** p < 0.01 vs. control group; # p < 0.05 vs. T2D model group; ## p < 0.01 vs. T2D model group by Mann–Whitney U rank sum test.
Figure 5The heatmap of relative abundances of major genera in fecal samples of different groups are presented in gray levels after min–max normalization (left) and Spearman’s correlation value between relative abundances of major genera and biochemical parameters (right).