Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T06:28:35.611Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The action of the β-agonist clenbuterol on protein and energy metabolism in fattening wether lambs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

J. C. MacRae ,
Pat A. Skene ,
Alexmary Connell ,
Vivien Buchan  and
G. E. Lobley
J. C. MacRae
Affiliation:
Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB2 9SB
Pat A. Skene
Affiliation:
Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB2 9SB
Alexmary Connell
Affiliation:
Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB2 9SB
Vivien Buchan
Affiliation:
Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB2 9SB
G. E. Lobley
Affiliation:
Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB2 9SB
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Five Greyface wethers (42–45 kg) fed on various fixed amounts of dried grass pellets (either approximately 1·3 times maintenance or 2 times maintenance) by means of belt-type continuous feeders were housed in opencircuit respiration chambers for periods of 45 d. Between days 15 and 35 they received daily oral doses of 1·5 mg of the β-adrenergic agonist clenbuterol (adsorbed on to the feed). Continuous energy and nitrogen balance measurements each of 5 d duration were conducted throughout the chamber confinement.

2. On six occasions (twice during the 15 d pre-clenbuterol period, on days +4, +11 and +18 of clenbuterol administration and once during the post-treatment period) animals were infused with [l-14C]leucine to determine the rates of leucine oxidation and the amounts of leucine available for protein synthesis.

3. Clenbuterol administration caused a marked increase in N retention (2–3 g N/d; P < 0·001) throughout the 20 d treatment period. It also increased (P < 0·001) the energy expenditure of the animals (on average by 1·1 MJ/d over the first 5 d, compared with immediate pretreatment values, and 0·6 MJ/d over the 20 d period, compared with the mean of pre- and post-treatment control values). The effect of treatment was calculated to result, on average, in the daily retention of 19 (SE 1·5) g more protein and 30 (SE 5·5) g less fat.

4. During clenbuterol treatment leucine oxidation was reduced (P < 0·01). However, values for the amounts of leucine available for protein synthesis were equivocal, with an increase (P < 0·001) on day 11 of treatment, but no change on days 4 and 18.

5. Withdrawal of the clenbuterol resulted in rapid alterations of N and energy metabolism towards those expected of control animals of that weight.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 59 , Issue 3 , May 1988 , pp. 457 - 465
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1988

References

Baker, P. K., Dalrymple, R. H., Ingle, D. L. & Ricks, C. A. (1984). Journal of Animal Science 59, 1256–1261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beerman, D. H., Hogue, D. E., Fishell, V. K., Dalrymple, R. H. & Ricks, C. A. (1986). Journal of Animal Science 62, 370–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohorov, O., Buttery, P. J., Correia, J. H. R. D. & Soar, J. B. (1987). British Journal of Nutrition 57, 99–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brockway, J. M. (1979). Laboratory Practice 28, 139.Google Scholar
Brockway, J. M., MacRae, J. C. & Williams, P. E. V. (1987). Veterinary Record 120, 381–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brouwer, E. (1965). In Energy Metabolism, pp. 441–443 [Blaxter, K. L., editor]. New York and London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Dalrymple, R. H., Baker, P. K., Doscher, M. E., Ingle, D. L., Paskavich, J. A. & Ricks, C. A. (1984 a). Journal of Animal Science 59, Suppl. 1, 212.Google Scholar
Dalrymple, R. H., Ricks, C. A., Baker, P. K., Pensack, J. M., Gingher, P. E. & Ingle, D. L. (1984 b). Poultry Science 63, 2376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department of Health and Social Security (1984). Diet and Cardiovascular Disease. Committee on Medical Aspects of Food Policy. Report on Health and Social Subjects no. 28. London: H. M. Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Emery, P. W., Rothwell, N. J., Stock, M. J. & Winter, P. D. (1984). Bioscience Reports 4, 83–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lobley, G. E., Connell, A., Mollison, G. S., Brewer, A. C., Harris, C. I. & Buchan, V. (1985). British Journal of Nutrition 54, 681–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lobley, G. E., Milne, V., Lovie, J. M., Reeds, P. J. & Pennie, K. (1980). British Journal of Nutrition 43, 491–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacRae, J. C., Lobley, G. E., Skene, P. A. & James, S. (1986). Journal of Animal Science 63, Suppl. 1, 453.Google Scholar
National Advisory Committee on Nutrition Education (1983). A Discussion Paper on Proposals for Nutritional Guidelines for Health Education in Britain. London: Health Education Council.Google Scholar
Reeds, P. J., Cadenhead, A., Fuller, M. F., Lobley, G. E. & McDonald, J. D. (1980). British Journal of Nutrition 43, 445–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeds, P. J., Hay, S. M., Dorwood, P. M. & Palmer, R. M. (1986). British Journal of Nutrition 56, 249–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeds, P. J., Hay, S. M., Dorwood, P. M. & Palmer, R. M. (1988). Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology. (In the Press.)Google Scholar
Ricks, C. A., Dalrymple, R. H., Baker, P. K. & Ingle, D. L. (1984). Journal of Animal Science 59, 1247–1255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothwell, N. J., Stock, M. J. & Winter, P. D. O'B. (1983). Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 43, 71A.Google Scholar
Sutherland, T. M., Gupta, G. N., Reid, R. S. & Murray, M. G. (1964). Proceedings of International Congress of Nutrition VI, Edinburgh 1964, p. 579. Edinburgh: Livingstone.Google Scholar
Turgeon, O. A., Brink, D. R., Bartle, S. J., Klopfenstein, T. J. & Ferrell, C. L. (1986). Journal of Animal Science 63, 770–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, P. E. V., Pagliani, L., Innes, G. M., Pennie, K., Harris, C. I. & Garthwaite, P. (1987). British Journal of Nutrition 57, 417–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar