Mass recovery following caloric restriction reverses lipolysis and proteolysis, but not gluconeogenesis, in insulin resistant OLETF rats.

Caloric restriction (CR) is one of the most important behavioral interventions to reduce excessive abdominal adiposity, which is a risk factor for the development of insulin resistance. Previous metabolomics studies have characterized substrate metabolism during healthy conditions; however, the effe...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Manuel A Cornejo, Jaapna Dhillon, Akira Nishiyama, Daisuke Nakano, Rudy M Ortiz
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021
Materias:
R
Q
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/896335748a53494e9fef5f20670c400d
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
Descripción
Sumario:Caloric restriction (CR) is one of the most important behavioral interventions to reduce excessive abdominal adiposity, which is a risk factor for the development of insulin resistance. Previous metabolomics studies have characterized substrate metabolism during healthy conditions; however, the effects of CR and subsequent mass recovery on shifts in substrate metabolism during insulin resistance (IR) have not been widely investigated. To assess the effects of acute CR and the subsequent mass recovery on shifts in substrate metabolism, a cohort of 15-week old Long Evans Tokushima Otsuka (LETO) and Otsuka Long Evans Tokushima Fatty (OLETF) rats were calorie restricted (CR: 50% × 10 days) with or without partial body mass recovery (PR; 73% x 7 days), along with their respective ad libitum controls. End-of-study plasma samples were analyzed for primary carbon metabolites by gas chromatography (GC) time-of-flight (TOF) mass spectrometry (MS) data acquisition. Data analysis included PCA, Pearson correlation vs previously reported variables (adipose and body masses, and insulin resistance index, IRI), and metabolomics maps (MetaMapp) generated for the most significant group comparisons. All treatments elicited a significant group differentiation in at least one principal component. CR improved TCA cycle in OLETF, and increased lipolysis and proteolysis. These changes were reversed after PR except for gluconeogenesis. Plasma lipid concentrations were inversely correlated to IRI in LETO, but not OLETF. These shifts in substrate metabolism suggest that the CR-induced decreases in adipose may not be sufficient to more permanently alter substrate metabolism to improve IR status during metabolic syndrome.