| Literature DB >> 33857162 |
Zuolin Ma1, Fumei Zhang2,3,4, Hongxin Ma2,5, Xinghao Chen2,5, Jiaqing Yang2,5, Yiyan Yang2,5, Xueying Yang2,5, Xiaojing Tian2,3,5, Qunli Yu1, Zhongren Ma2,3,5, Xueyan Zhou2,3,5.
Abstract
The elderly usually suffer from many diseases. Improving the quality of life of the elderly is an urgent social issue. In this present study, D-galactose treated aging mice models were used to reveal the effects of different animal sources and different doses of whey protein (WP) on the immune indexes organs and intestinal flora. A total of 9 groups were set up, including normal control (NC), negative control (NS), positive control (Vc), low-, medium- and high-doses of cow WP intervention groups (CL, CM and CH for short, correspondingly) and low-, medium- and high-doses of goat WP intervention groups (GL, GM and GH for short, correspondingly). The body weight gain, thymus/body weight ratio, superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity, malondialdehyde (MDA) content, spleen immunoglobulins G (IgG), spleen interleukin-2 (IL-2) and spleen interleukin-2 (IL-6) were measured. Then, the intestinal contents were collected, and 16s genes of intestinal bacteria were sequenced to reveal the changes in bacterial flora structure. WP intervention significantly increased the weight gain, thymus/body ratio and SOD activity, but decrease the content of MDA. WP intervention increased some immune indicators. All the WP treated aging mice showed similar values of physiological indexes to that of the Vc group, even better. The relative abundance of Lactobacillus and Stenotrophomonas was increased and decreased, respectively, by both cow and goat WP. Lactobacillus may be involved in regulating the functional repair of organisms. In contrast, Stenotrophomonas might play a negative role in the immune and antioxidant capacity of the body. Combining physiological indicators and intestinal flora structure, low-concentration WP for cow and goat might be optimal for aging models.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33857162 PMCID: PMC8049228 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248329
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Details of different treatment in different groups.
| Groups | Treatment | |
|---|---|---|
| Intraperitoneal injection | Intragastric administration | |
| NC | -- | Ns 0.5mL/mouse/d |
| NS | 10% D-galactose 0.25mL/20g/d | Ns 0.5mL/mouse/d |
| Vc | 10% D-galactose 0.25mL/20g/d | Vc 300mg/kg/d |
| CL | 10% D-galactose 0.25mL/20g/d | CWP 100mg/kg/d |
| CM | 10% D-galactose 0.25mL/20g/d | CWP 200mg/kg/d |
| CH | 10% D-galactose 0.25mL/20g/d | CWP 400mg/kg/d |
| GL | 10% D-galactose 0.25mL/20g/d | GWP 100mg/kg/d |
| GM | 10% D-galactose 0.25mL/20g/d | GWP 200mg/kg/d |
| GH | 10% D-galactose 0.25mL/20g/d | GWP 400mg/kg/d |
CWP: Cow whey protein; GWP: Goat whey protein; NC: Normal control; NS: Negative control, normal saline treatment; Vc: Positive control, vitamin C treatment; CL, CM, CH represents low-, middle-, high-concentration cow whey protein intervention group, respectively. GL, GM, GH represents low-, middle-, high-concentration goat whey protein intervention group, respectively.
Effects of whey protein intervention on physiological indexes of aging mice.
| Groups | Weight gain (%) | Thymus/body (mg/g) | SOD activity (U/mL) | MDA content (nmol/mL) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C | 17.626±2.909a | 2.967±0.2082a | 82.444±2.296a | 2.0000±0.54358a |
| NS | 0.356±0.311c | 2.367±0.1155b | 42.500±1.516b | 5.7632±0.68959b |
| Vc | 3.516±1.576b | 2.967±0.2517a | 76.125±4.788a | 3.0514±0.96282a |
NC: Normal control; NS: Negative control, normal saline treatment; Vc: Positive control, vitamin C treatment; Different letters indicate different statistical significances (p<0.05). SOD: Superoxide dismutase; MDA: Malondialdehyde.
Alpha indexes in different groups.
| Observed_species | Shannon | Simpson | Chao1 | ACE | PD_whole_tree | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C | 249.31±23.21 ab | 3.51±0.11 b | 0.81±0.01 ab | 299.71±33.31 ab | 318.41±38.91 ac | 25.21±3.31 ab |
| NS | 147.01±24.11 b | 2.81±0.61 c | 0.71±0.11 b | 162.21±28.81 b | 172.61±32.21 b | 33.61±28.21 ab |
| Vc | 268.71±55.91 a | 3.21±0.31 bc | 0.81±0.01 b | 309.91±79.71 a | 323.41±82.91 a | 25.31±7.11 ab |
| CL | 199.71±46.21 ab | 3.31±0.31 bc | 0.81±0.01 ab | 227.31±53.11 ab | 236.31±48.31 abc | 34.91±6.81 ab |
| CM | 185.01±69.61 ab | 3.11±0.11 bc | 0.81±0.01 b | 199.81±77.11 ab | 205.91±83.51 abc | 20.81±5.21 b |
| CH | 232.31±52.81 ab | 4.31±0.41 a | 0.91±0.01 a | 249.51±55.91 ab | 257.91±53.31 abc | 55.91±20.71 ab |
| GL | 145.71±38.91 b | 3.01±0.31 bc | 0.81±0.01 b | 163.11±42.01 b | 176.01±46.41 bc | 41.81±25.21 ab |
| GM | 270.31±70.31 a | 3.41±0.41 bc | 0.81±0.11 ab | 311.51±89.21 a | 309.71±81.71 abc | 66.51±46.61 ab |
| GH | 219.31±84.41 ab | 3.51±0.41 b | 0.81±0.01 ab | 253.51±107.41 ab | 257.81±110.71 abc | 70.81±27.71 a |
NC: Normal control; NS: Negative control, normal saline treatment; Vc: Positive control, vitamin C treatment; CL, CM, CH represents low-, middle-, high-concentration cow intervention group, respectively. GL, GM, GH represents low-, middle-, high-concentration GWP intervention group, respectively.