Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T02:38:48.550Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Deposition of fat in the body of the rat during rehabilitation after early undernutrition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 July 2007

Patricia M. Harris  and
Elsie M. Widdowson
Patricia M. Harris
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 2QQ
Elsie M. Widdowson
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 2QQ
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. Male and female rats aged 3 weeks were divided into two groups. One group of each sex was allowed unlimited access to the stock diet, the other group was given the stock diet in restricted amounts for 10 weeks so that the males gained only 19 g and the females 21 g in comparison with 176 g and 116 g for the well-nourished males and females respectively. The undernourished animals were then rehabilitated by being allowed the stock diet ad lib.

2. Five animals of each sex were killed at various stages of the experiment, their bodies analysed for fat and nitrogen, and the size and number of fat cells determined in specific fat depots.

3. The undernourished rats failed to make a complete recovery and were significantly smaller than the controls of the same sex at 172 d of age when the experiment terminated.

4. The previously undernourished rats deposited significantly more fat in their bodies during rehabilitation than the control animals in the same number of days and over the same gain in body-weight.

5. There were no significant differences in the number of cells containing fat at the abdominal fat site between the undernourished and rehabilitated animals and the controls at any stage, nor were there any significant differences in apparent fat cell numbers between the control and rehabilitated animals at any of the other sites studied when the experiment ended at 172 d.

Type
Papers of direct relevance to Clinical and Human Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 39 , Issue 1 , January 1978 , pp. 201 - 211
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1978

References

Allden, W. G. (1970). Nutr. Abstr. Rev. 40, 1167.Google Scholar
Ashworth, A. (1969). Br. J. Nutr. 23, 835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brook, C. G. D. (1972). Lancet ii, 624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dauncey, M. J. & Gairdner, D. (1975). Archs Dis. Childh. 50, 286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elsley, F. W. H., McDonald, I. & Fowler, V. R. (1964). Anim. Prod. 6, 141.Google Scholar
Greenwood, M. R. C. & Hirsch, J. (1974). J. Lipid Res. 15, 474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirsch, J. & Han, P. (1969). J. Lipid Res. 10, 77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirsch, J. & Knittle, J. L. (1970). Fedn Proc. Fedn Am. Socs exp. biol. 29, 1516.Google Scholar
Lister, D. & McCance, R. A. (1967). Br. J. Nutr. 21, 787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McMeekan, C. P. (1940). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 30, 511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, J. H. & Clawson, W. J. (1964). J. Anim. Sci. 23, 214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munro, H. N. & Fleck, A. (1969). In Mammalian Protein Metabolism, Vol. 3, p. 423 [Munro, H. N. editor]. New York and London: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ridgman, W. J. (1975). Experimentation in Biology. London: Blackie.Google Scholar
Southgate, D. A. T. (1971). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 22, 590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widdowson, E. M. (1974). Adv. exp. Med. Biol. 49, 165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widdowson, E. M. (1977). Proc. Nutr. Soc. (In the press.)Google Scholar
Widdowson, E. M., Mavor, W. O. & McCance, R. A. (1964). J. Endocr. 29, 119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widdowson, E. M. & Shaw, W. T. (1973). Lancet ii, 905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar