Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T12:47:53.750Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Endogenous loss of leucine and methionine in adult male rats

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 August 2007

R. J. Neale  and
J. C. Waterlow
R. J. Neale
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Biochemistry and Nutrition, University of Nottingham, School of Agriculture, Sutton Bonington, Loughborough, LE12 5RD
J. C. Waterlow
Affiliation:
Department of Human Nutrition, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT
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. The fractional rate of loss of 14C and body-weight was measured in adult male rats after giving 14C-labelled methionine or leucine and maintaining rats for 30 d on a low-protein or a specific methionine+cystine-free diet: carcasses were then analysed for protein and fat 14C radioactivity.

2. The fractional loss of 14CO2 from [14C]methionine or [14C]leucine between day 20 and day 30 was always greater than the fractional loss of body-weight.

3. Carcass protein 14C radioactivity after giving [14C]leucine was higher than after giving [14C]methionine, but fat 14C radioactivity after either 14C-labelled amino acid was only a small proportion of the total body 14C radioactivity.

4. After correction of the fractional loss of 14CO2 for urinary 14C loss, but not body-weight loss, absolute amino acid loss was calculated using published values for methionine and leucine content of rats.

5. The best estimates of endogenous amino acid loss obtained using 1-14C-labelled amino acids, expressed as mg/kg body-weight0.75 per day were leucine 79, methionine 38.

Type
Papers of direct relevance to Clinical and Human Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 37 , Issue 2 , March 1977 , pp. 259 - 268
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1977

References

REFERENCES

Aguilar, T. S., Harper, A. E. & Benevenga, N. J. (1972). J. Nutr. 102, 1199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benevenga, N. J. & Harper, A. E. (1970), J. Nutr. 100, 1205.Google Scholar
Bressani, R., Braham, J. E., Elias, L. G. & Balconi, R. (1966). J. Nutr. 87, 77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FAO (1970). F.A.O. Nutr. Stud. no. 24.Google Scholar
FAO\WHO (1965). Tech. Rep. Ser. Wld Hlth Org. no. 301.Google Scholar
McCance, R. A. & Widdowson, E. M. (1960). Spec. Rep. Ser. med. Res. Coun. Lond. no. 297.Google Scholar
Neale, R. J. & Waterlow, J. C. (1974 a). Br. J. Nutr. 32, 11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neale, R. J. & Waterlow, J. C. (1974 b). Br. J. Nutr. 32, 257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, P. R. & Stewart, R. J. C. (1972). Lab. Anim. 6, 135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeds, P. J. (1974). Br. J. Nutr. 31, 259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Said, A. K. & Hegsted, D. M. (1970). J. Nutr. 100, 1363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sketcher, R. D., Fern, E. B. & James, W. P. T. (1974). Br. J. Nutr. 31, 333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sketcher, R. D. & James, W. P. T. (1974). Br. J. Nutr. 32, 615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waterlow, J. C., Garrow, J. S. & Millward, D. J. (1969). Clin. Sci. 36, 489.Google Scholar