| Literature DB >> 32849314 |
Erin Vanessa LaRae Smith1,2, Rebecca Maree Dyson1,2, Mary Judith Berry1,2, Clint Gray1,2.
Abstract
Excess dietary fructose is a major public health concern (1-4). Evidence shows increased fructose intake can cause insulin resistance, hepatic de novo lipogenesis, hypertriglyceridemia, obesity and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) (5-9). However, little is known about the effects of fructose during pregnancy and its influence on offspring development and predisposition to later-life disease. To determine whether moderately increased maternal fructose intake could have health consequences on offspring, we have investigated the effects of 10% w/v fructose water intake during preconception and pregnancy. Female Dunkin Hartley guinea pigs were fed a control diet (CD) or fructose diet (FD;10% kcal from fructose) ad-libitum 60 days prior to mating and throughout gestation. Offspring were culled at weaning, day 21 (d21). Compared to CD dams, FD dams had altered glucose metabolism and increased milk free fatty acid content. Matsuda-DeFronzo insulin sensitivity index (M-ISI) from OGTT plasma showed no significant difference in whole-body insulin sensitivity between FD and CD dams 60 days post-dietary intervention and during midgestation. Fetal exposure to increased maternal fructose resulted in offspring with significantly altered serum free fatty acids at days 0, 7, 14, and 21 [including pentadecanoic acid (15:0), dma16:0, margaric acid (17:0) palmitoleic acid, total omega-7 and total saturates], increased levels of uric acid and triglycerides were also observed at d21. We have demonstrated that increased fructose intake during pregnancy can cause significant changes in maternal metabolic function and milk composition, which alters offspring metabolism. Taken together, these changes in pregnancy outcomes and feto-maternal condition may underlie their offspring's predisposition to metabolic dysfunction during later-life.Entities:
Keywords: developmental programming; free fatty acids; hepatic lipids; maternal fructose; milk composition
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32849314 PMCID: PMC7431635 DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2020.00550
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) ISSN: 1664-2392 Impact factor: 5.555
Guinea pig pellet nutrition facts and ingredients from Nutritech (Nutritech International Ltd., NZ).
| Broll | 381.00 | 38.10 | Bulk | 1.00 | 1.14 |
| Lucerne pellets | 300.00 | 30.00 | Dry Matter (%) | 88.02 | 100.00 |
| Barley | 220.00 | 22.00 | RUM_MER (MJ/kg) | 10.03 | 11.40 |
| Soya, extr, 47% | 55.00 | 5.50 | Crude Protein (%) | 15.90 | 18.06 |
| Molasses, cane | 20.00 | 2.00 | Oil A (%) | 2.61 | 2.96 |
| Limestone | 20.00 | 2.00 | Crude Fiber (%) | 12.37 | 14.05 |
| Salt | 2.00 | 0.20 | ADF (%) | 15.31 | 17.39 |
| Rabbit Premix | 2.00 | 0.20 | NDF (%) | 29.87 | 33.93 |
| Rabbit Premix | 2.00 | 0.20 | NDF (%) | 29.87 | 33.93 |
| Total | 1,000.00 kg | 100.00 | Starch (%) | 20.92 | 23.77 |
| Starch + Sugar (%) | 26.57 | 30.19 | |||
| Calcium (%) | 1.32 | 1.50 | |||
| Phosphorus (%) | 0.55 | 0.62 | |||
| Magnesium (%) | 0.24 | 0.27 | |||
| Sodium (%) | 0.11 | 0.13 | |||
Figure 1Pre-pregnancy and pregnancy weight gain during fructose-feeding (A) dam pre-pregnancy and (B) pregnancy weight gain. FD dams were fructose-fed for 60 d prior to mating and throughout pregnancy. CD (n = 10); FD (n = 9). Graph (A) represents average pre-pregnancy weight gain (12–20 wk), graph (B) represents average pregnancy weight gain (1–11 wk). All data were analyzed as a 2x2 factorial design with diet*time*interaction included (generalized linear model analysis) using IBM SPSS statistics 25 (IBM, USA). Data shown as standard error of the mean (SEM).
Figure 2Dam pre-pregnancy and midgestation OGTT glucose AUC and insulin AUC (A) dam blood glucose AUC in response to OGTT pre-pregnancy 60 days post-dietary intervention. (B) Dam plasma insulin AUC in response to OGTT pre-pregnancy 60 days post-dietary intervention. (C) Dam blood glucose AUC in response to OGTT midgestation. (D) Dam plasma insulin AUC in response to OGTT midgestation.CD (n = 10); FD (n = 9). All data were analyzed as a 2x2 factorial design with diet*time*interaction included (generalized linear model analysis) using IBM SPSS statistics 25 (IBM, USA). Data shown as standard error of the mean (SEM).
Dam plasma biochemistry at pre-pregnancy 60 days post-dietary intervention and midgestation.
| CHOL (mmol/L) | Control | 0.64 ± 0.10 | 0.48 ± 0.09 |
| Fructose | 0.64 ± 0.05 | 0.37 ± 0.03 | |
| LDL (mmol/L) | Control | 0.71 ± 0.08 | 0.19 ± 0.01 |
| Fructose | 0.72 ± 0.05 | 0.22 ± 0.02 | |
| HDL (mmol/L) | Control | 0.03 ± 0.01 | 0.02 ± 0.00 |
| Fructose | 0.15 ± 0.01 | 0.03 ± 0.00 | |
| TAG (mmol/L) | Control | 0.52 ± 0.03 | 1.53 ± 0.35 |
| Fructose | 0.69 ± 0.05 | 1.43 ± 0.29 | |
| UA (μmol/L | Control | 18.66 ± 2.76 | 21.55 ± 1.36 |
| Fructose | 21.00 ± 2.67 | 28.75 ± 1.88 |
CD (n = 10); FD (n = 9). All data was analyzed using an independent T-test using IBM SPSS statistics 25. Data presented as group mean ± SEM.
denotes significance of p < 0.05;
denotes significance of p < 0.001.
Dam pregnancy outcomes.
| Litter size | 3.90 ± 0.23 | 4.11 ± 0.20 |
| Stillbirth/Death at delivery | 0 | 0.44 ± 0.29 |
| Male birth weight | 90.08 ± 1.23 | 91.38 ± 1.23 |
| Female weight | 90.56 ± 1.23 | 88.71 ± 1.23 |
| Litter birth weight | 90.34 ± 1.23 | 90.15 ± 1.23 |
Control (n = 10) and fructose (n = 9). Litter size and stillbirth/death at delivery data was analyzed using an independent T-test while birth weight was analyzed using a 2x2 factorial design with diet, sex and interaction include (general analysis of variance) using IBM SPSS statistics 25. Data presented as group mean ± SEM.
Free fatty acids in dams' milk at day of delivery.
| Myristic acid (14:0) | 1.00 ± 0.05 | 1.16 ± 0.05 |
| Total trans fatty acids | 0.33 ± 0.03 | 0.46 ± 0.03 |
| Vaccenic acid (t18:1n-7) | 0.15 ± 0.01 | 0.22 ± 0.00 |
| Linoelaidic acid (t18:2) | 0.04 ± 0.00 | 0.12 ± 0.02 |
| Cis-Vaccenic acid (18:1n-7) | 1.14 ± 0.06 | 1.31 ± 0.04 |
| Total omega-7 | 2.39 ± 0.12 | 2.71 ± 0.08 |
| Gamma-Linolenic acid (18:3n-6) | 0.06 ± 0.00 | 0.08 ± 0.00 |
| Total saturates | 30.23 ± 1.31 | 31.64 ± 1.09 |
| Lauric acid (12:0) | 0.03 ± 0.00 | 0.03 ± 0.00 |
| Pentadecanoic acid (15:0) | 0.46 ± 0.02 | 0.52 ± 0.02 |
| Palmitic acid (16:0) | 21.35 ± 0.96 | 23.44 ± 1.06 |
| Margaric acid (17:0) | 0.86 ± 0.02 | 0.91 ± 0.03 |
| Lignoceric acid (24:0) | 0.02 ± 0.00 | 0.02 ± 0.00 |
| Elaidic acid (t18:1n-9) | 0.08 ± 0.00 | 0.09 ± 0.00 |
| Total monos | 34.49 ± 0.43 | 35.49 ± 0.49 |
| Palmitoleic acid (16:1n-7) | 1.24 ± 0.08 | 1.39 ± 0.05 |
| Oleic acid (18:1n-9) | 32.11 ± 0.55 | 32.28 ± 0.42 |
| Total Omega-9 | 32.62 ± 0.55 | 32.77 ± 0.44 |
| Total Omega-3 | 5.08 ± 0.34 | 5.34 ± 0.29 |
| Arachidonic acid (20:4n-6) | 0.22 ± 0.02 | 0.23 ± 0.03 |
| Capric acid (10:0) | 0.05 ± 0.00 | 0.04 ± 0.00 |
| Stearic acid (18:0) | 5.49 ± 0.32 | 5.48 ± 0.34 |
| Arachidic acid (20:0) | 0.12 ± 0.00 | 0.11 ± 0.00 |
| Palmitelaidic acid (t16:1) | 0.06 ± 0.02 | 0.04 ± 0.00 |
| Gondoic acid (20:1n-9) | 0.48 ± 0.02 | 0.48 ± 0.03 |
| Alpha-Linolenic acid (18:3n-3) | 5.35 ± 0.46 | 5.18 ± 0.30 |
| Docosapentaenoic acid (22:5n-3) | 0.10 ± 0.00 | 0.10 ± 0.01 |
| Docosahexaenoic acid (22:6n-3) | 0.04 ± 0.00 | 0.04 ± 0.00 |
| Total Omega-6 | 27.61 ± 1.51 | 27.06 ± 0.85 |
| Linoleic acid (18:2n-6) | 26.42 ± 1.41 | 25.86 ± 0.77 |
| Eicosadienoic acid (20:2n-6) | 0.67 ± 0.05 | 0.64 ± 0.05 |
| Dihomo-y-linolenic acid (20:3n-6) | 0.17 ± 0.01 | 0.12 ± 0.02 |
| Adrenic acid (22:4n-6) | 0.10 ± 0.01 | 0.09 ± 0.015 |
Control (n = 10) and fructose (n = 9). All data was analyzed using an independent T-test using IBM SPSS statistics 25. Data presented as group mean ± SEM.
denotes significance of p < 0.05.
Figure 3Weanling offsprings' weight gain from days 0 to 21. Control males (n = 7); fructose males (n = 7); control females (n = 7) and fructose females (n = 7). Significant effects were shown in diet of fructose offspring weight gain. All data was analyzed using a 2x2 factorial design with repeated measures, diet andsex as factors (general analysis of variance) using IBM SPSS statistics 25. Data presented as group mean ± SEM. *denotes significance of p < 0.05.
Weanling offspring plasma biochemistry.
| CHOL (mmol/L) | Male | 0.87 ± 0.07 | 1.05 ± 0.07 |
| Female | 1.50 ± 0.07 | 1.35 ± 0.07 | |
| LDL (mmol/L) | Male | 0.79 ± 0.06 | 1.04 ± 0.06 |
| Female | 1.25 ± 0.06 | 1.22 ± 0.06 | |
| HDL (mmol/L) | Male | 0.08 ± 0.00 | 0.10 ± 0.00 |
| Female | 0.12 ± 0.00 | 0.13 ± 0.00 | |
| TAG (mmol/L) | Male | 0.51 ± 0.01 | 0.58 ± 0.01 |
| Female | 0.56 ± 0.01 | 0.68 ± 0.01 | |
| UA (μmol/L | Male | 42.33 ± 3.90 | 69.40 ± 3.90 |
| Female | 46.50 ± 3.90 | 62.75 ± 3.90 | |
Control males (n = 7); fructose males (n = 7); control females (n = 7) and fructose females (n = 7). All data was analyzed using a 2x2 factorial design with diet and sex (general analysis of variance) using IBM SPSS statistics 25. Data presented as group mean ± SEM.
denotes significance of p < 0.05;
denotes significance of p < 0.001.
Figure 4Free fatty acids in weanling offspring serum. Control males (n = 7); fructose males (n = 7); control females (n = 7) and fructose females (n = 7). (A) Represents offspring day 0 serum free fatty acids. (B) Represents offspring day 7 serum free fatty acids. (C) Represents offspring day 14 serum free fatty acids. (D) Represents offspring day 21 serum free fatty acids. All data was analyzed using a 2x2 factorial design with diet and sex as factors (general analysis of variance) using IBM SPSS statistics 25. Data presented as group mean ± SEM. *denotes significance of p < 0.05.
Plasma biochemistry of base blood glucose in weanling offspring.
| Base Blood Glucose (mmol/L) | Male | 6.73 ± 0.16 | 7.02 ± 0.16 | 7.40 ± 0.21 | 8.40 ± 0.21 | 7.50 ± 0.21 | 7.48 ± 0.21 | 7.97 ± 0.12 | 7.71 ± 0.12 |
| Female | 6.00 ± 0.16 | 6.65 ± 0.16 | 7.20 ± 0.21 | 8.08 ± 0.21 | 6.83 ± 0.21 | 7.00 ± 0.21 | 7.68 ± 0.12 | 7.22 ± 0.12 | |
Control males (n = 7); fructose males (n = 7); control females (n = 7) and fructose females (n = 7). All data was analyzed using a 2x2 factorial design with diet, sex and interaction include (general analysis of variance) using IBM SPSS statistics 25. Data presented as group mean ± SEM.
denotes significance of p < 0.05.