| Literature DB >> 35763459 |
Bara Lo1, Nathalie Marty-Gasset1, Helene Manse1, Cecile Canlet2,3, Renaud Domitile4, Herve Remignon1.
Abstract
Understanding the evolution of fatty liver metabolism of ducks is a recurrent issue for researchers and industry. Indeed, the increase in weight during the overfeeding period leads to an important change in the liver metabolism. However, liver weight is highly variable at the end of overfeeding within a batch of animals reared, force-fed and slaughtered in the same way. For this study, we performed a proton nuclear magnetic resonance (1H-NMR) analysis on two classes of fatty liver samples, called low-weight liver (weights between 550 and 599 g) and high-weight liver (weights above 700 g). The aim of this study was to identify the differences in metabolism between two classes of liver weight (low and high). Firstly, the results suggested that increased liver weight is associated with higher glucose uptake leading to greater lipid synthesis. Secondly, this increase is probably also due to a decline in the level of export of triglycerides from the liver by maintaining them at high hepatic concentration levels, but also of hepatic cholesterol. Finally, the increase in liver weight could lead to a significant decrease in the efficiency of aerobic energy metabolism associated with a significant increase in the level of oxidative stress. However, all these hypotheses will have to be confirmed in the future, by studies on plasma levels and specific assays to validate these results.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35763459 PMCID: PMC9239462 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0255707
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.752
Liver weights (LW), gross chemical composition and color parameters of livers from the two studied groups (n = 8 samples / group).
| LWL | HWL | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 581 ± 18 | 745 ± 24 | *** |
|
| 61.4 ± 0.5 | 61.6 ± 0.7 | NS |
|
| 71.3 ± 1.8 | 71.4 ± 1.5 | NS |
|
| 6.64 ± 0.41 | 5.76 ± 0.38 | *** |
Values are means ± SD. Within a line, p-values indicate the level of significance (*P ≤ 0.05, **P ≤ 0.01, ***P ≤ 0.001, and NS: not significant).
Standard scaling of predictors and response.
| Component | R2X | R2X(cum) | R2Y | R2Y(cum) | Q2 | Q2(cum) | RMSEE | pR2Y | pQ2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.21 | 0.21 | 0.792 | 0.792 | 0.587 | 0.587 | 0.244 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 2 | 0.19 | 0.4 | 0.074 | 0.866 | 0.01 | 0.597 | 0.203 | 0.022 | 0.002 |
Fig 1PLS-DA score plots according to the two first latent variables for the two liver weight groups and their 30 variant metabolites (n = 8 livers / group).
List of the 30 metabolites identified in the samples from the LWL and/or the HLW groups.
| Metabolites | LWL/HWL | VIP | FDR-corrected p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Uridine | 1.14 | 1.18 | 0.07 |
| Glycerol | 1.20 | 0.57 | 0.07 |
| AceticAcid | 1.18 | 1.13 | 0.09 |
| Glycerophosphocholine | 1.18 | 1.11 | 0.09 |
| L-Glutamine | 0.76 | 1.07 | 0.11 |
| D-Sorbitol | 0.57 | 1.26 | 0.12 |
| L-Alanine | 0.89 | 1.10 | 0.12 |
| D-Maltose | 0.68 | 1.19 | 0.14 |
| L-Serine | 0.89 | 0.86 | 0.27 |
| MalicAcid | 1.56 | 1.04 | 0.29 |
| Succinate | 1.10 | 0.72 | 0.36 |
| L-GlutamicAcid | 0.89 | 0.65 | 0.39 |
| L-Carnitine | 1.06 | 0.64 | 0.40 |
| L-Leucine | 1.07 | 0.70 | 0.45 |
| L-Proline | 1.07 | 0.64 | 0.48 |
| Myo-Inositol | 0.94 | 0.43 | 0.54 |
| L-Valine | 1.06 | 0.59 | 0.61 |
| Phosphocholine | 0.92 | 0.35 | 0.69 |
| L-Glycine | 0.97 | 0.42 | 0.72 |
| ArgininosuccinicAcid | 0.97 | 0.41 | 0.72 |
| Betaine | 1.09 | 0.18 | 0.81 |
| L-Aspartate | 1.03 | 0.24 | 0.84 |
| Taurine | 1.02 | 0.14 | 0.90 |
| 2-Oxoglutarate | 0.86 | 0.68 | 0.96 |
VIP values > 1 and FDR-corrected p-value < 0.05 allowed to identify the significant LWL / HWL ratios which were reported in bold (n = 8 samples / group).
Fig 2Correlation matrix of liver weight and metabolites identified as most significant in distinguishing the 2 liver weight group.
Non-significant correlations (p-value > 0.05) are indicated by a cross.