| Literature DB >> 32121111 |
Curie Kim1, Ana Margarida Pinto2, Claire Bordoli2, Luke Patrick Buckner2, Polly Charlotte Kaplan2, Ines Maria Del Arenal2, Emma Jane Jeffcock2, Wendy L Hall2, Sandrine Thuret1,3.
Abstract
Adult neurogenesis, the generation of new neurons throughout life, occurs in the subventricular zone of the dentate gyrus in the human hippocampal formation. It has been shown in rodents that adult hippocampal neurogenesis is needed for pattern separation, the ability to differentially encode small changes derived from similar inputs, and recognition memory, as well as the ability to recognize previously encountered stimuli. Improved hippocampus-dependent cognition and cellular readouts of adult hippocampal neurogenesis have been reported in daily energy restricted and intermittent fasting adult mice. Evidence that nutrition can significantly affect brain structure and function is increasing substantially. This randomized intervention study investigated the effects of intermittent and continuous energy restriction on human hippocampal neurogenesis-related cognition, which has not been reported previously. Pattern separation and recognition memory were measured in 43 individuals with central obesity aged 35-75 years, before and after a four-week dietary intervention using the mnemonic similarity task. Both groups significantly improved pattern separation (P = 0.0005), but only the intermittent energy restriction group had a significant deterioration in recognition memory. There were no significant differences in cognitive improvement between the two diets. This is the first human study to investigate the association between energy restriction with neurogenesis-associated cognitive function. Energy restriction may enhance hippocampus-dependent memory and could benefit those in an ageing population with declining cognition. This study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02679989) on 11 February 2016.Entities:
Keywords: adult hippocampal neurogenesis; ageing; cognition; energy restriction; intermittent fasting; pattern separation; randomized controlled trial; recognition memory
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32121111 PMCID: PMC7146388 DOI: 10.3390/nu12030638
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Figure 1CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) diagram for the Met-IER study (Metabolic effects of Intermittent Energy Restriction). IER: intermittent energy restriction; CER: continuous energy restriction.
Baseline Characteristics. There are no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the intermittent energy restriction (IER) or the continuous energy restriction (CER) group. Data is representative of both genders as a single cohort. Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation. Significance at P < 0.05. IER: intermittent energy restriction; CER: continuous energy restriction; BMI: body mass index.
| Characteristic | IER ( | CER ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 50.0 ± 12.7 | 55.7 ± 8.2 | 0.066 |
| Weight (kg) | 87.6 ± 16.8 | 89.1 ± 20.0 | 0.820 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 32.0 ± 4.7 | 30.9 ± 5.6 | 0.529 |
| Waist circumference (cm) | 107.7 ± 9.3 | 110.5 ± 15.8 | 0.971 |
| Hip circumference (cm) | 114.4 ± 8.8 | 115.7 ± 12.6 | 0.686 |
| Waist to hip ratio | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 1.0 ± 0.1 | 0.557 |
| Body fat (%) | 39.9 ± 6.5 | 37.5 ± 7.1 | 0.258 |
| Resting metabolic rate (kcal/day) | 1404.2 ± 276.6 | 1378.2 ± 304.1 | 0.772 |
| Physical activity levels | 1.44 ± 0.2 | 1.45 ± 0.1 | 0.925 |
| Total energy expenditure (kcal/day) | 1999.1 ± 357.1 | 2036.2 ± 476.9 | 0.818 |
Anthropometric measurements are all decreased after four weeks of energy restriction. There was no significant difference in the percentage change in compliant participants between the groups in any anthropometric measure. Data is representative of both genders as a single cohort. The values are presented as the mean ± standard deviation. Significance at P < 0.05. IER: intermittent energy restriction; CER: continuous energy restriction; BMI: body mass index.
| Characteristic | IER ( | CER ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| % Change in weight (kg) | −3.1 ± 1.6 | −2.8 ± 1.6 | 0.578 |
| % Change in BMI (kg/m2) | −3.1 ± 1.5 | −2.8 ± 1.6 | 0.631 |
| % Change in waist circumference (cm) | −3.8 ± 2.4 | −4.3 ± 2.9 | 0.589 |
| % Change in hip circumference (cm) | −1.9 ± 1.6 | −2.0 ± 2.7 | 0.932 |
| % Change in waist to hip ratio | −1.9 ± 2.5 | −2.3 ± 3.1 | 0.675 |
Figure 2Energy restriction improves pattern separation regardless of method. (a) There is no significant difference between IER and CER in pattern separation and recognition memory performance, as measured by LDI and REC scores, respectively. However, the IER group had a significant reduction in REC score (P = 0.007), which was not observed in the CER group. (b) When the groups are treated as a single cohort, there is a significant increase in LDI score (P = 0.0005). Significance at P < 0.05. ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001. IER: intermittent energy restriction; CER: continuous energy restriction LDI: lure discrimination index; REC: recognition.