Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T03:48:07.952Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experimental protein-energy deficiency in rats. Ratio of serine+glycine to threonine as an index of deficiency

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 July 2007

Sohair I. Salem ,
S. M. Hegazi  and
S. R. Morcos
Sohair I. Salem
Affiliation:
Food Science and Nutrition Research Department, National Research Centre, Dokki, Cairo, Egypt
S. M. Hegazi
Affiliation:
Food Science and Nutrition Research Department, National Research Centre, Dokki, Cairo, Egypt
S. R. Morcos
Affiliation:
Food Science and Nutrition Research Department, National Research Centre, Dokki, Cairo, Egypt
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. Rats were given a low-protein (10 g/kg) diet for 16 weeks and the changes occurring in their serum amino acids were studied; during this time a full picture of protein-energy malnutrition was manifested. Groups of rats were killed at intervals of 4 weeks.

2. Food intake decreased gradually from the 4th to the 8th week, then increased slightly from the 9th to the 11th week, and then decreased again.

3. The body-weight of the rats fell progressively from the 1st week on the low-protein diet, remained stationary from the 10th to the 13th week, and then decreased again during the last 4 weeks.

4. The ratio of non-essential to essential amino acid was not correlated with the severity of protein deficiency.

5. The ratios between some individual amino acids were compared with these ratios in control rats during the 4-week periods of protein deficiency. The ratio of serine+glycine to threonine was always significantly higher in the protein-deficient than in the control rats.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 29 , Issue 1 , January 1973 , pp. 113 - 120
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1973

References

REFERENCES

Arroyave, G. (1962). Am. J. clin. Nutr. I, 447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deo, M. G., Sood, S. K. & Ramalingaswami, V. (1965). Arch Path. 80, 14.Google Scholar
Edozien, J. C. (1968). Nature, Lond. 220, 917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gopalan, C. & Ramanathan, K. S. (1957). Indian J. med. Res. 45, 65.Google Scholar
Grimble, R. F., Sayer, M. B. & Whitehead, R. G. (1969). Br. J. Nutr. 23, 879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimble, R. F. & Whitehead, R. G. (1969). Br. J. Nutr. 23, 791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimble, R. F. & Whitehead, R. G. (1970). Br. J. Nutr. 24, 557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heard, C. R. C., Kriegsman, S. M. & Platt, B. S. (1968). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 27, 20A.Google Scholar
Holt, L. E. Jr, Snyderman, S. E., Norton, P. M., Roitman, E. & Finch, J. (1963). Lancet ii, 1343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, E. J. & Wootton, I. D. P. (1959). Micro-analysis in Medical Biochemistry 3rd ed., p. 160. London: J. & A. Churchill.Google Scholar
Kirsch, R. E., Brock, J. F. & Saunders, S. J. (1968). Am. J. clin. Nutr. 21, 820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirsch, R. E., Saunders, S. J. & Brock, J. F. (1968). Am. J. clin. Nutr. 21, 1302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, A. L. & Chung, D. (1953). Analyt. Chem. 25, 396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCance, R. A. & Widdowson, E. M. (1966). Lancet ii, 158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, D. S. & Bender, A. E. (1955). Br. J. Nutr. 9, 382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morcos, S. R. (1967). Br. J. Nutr. 21, 269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rutishauser, I. H. E. & Whitehead, R. G. (1969). Br. J. Nutr. 23, I.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sidransky, H. & Verney, E. (1970). Am. J. clin. Nutr. 23, 1154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waterlow, J. C. (1968). Lancet ii, 1091.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehead, R. G. & Dean, R. F. A. (1964 a). Am. J. clin. Nutr. 14, 313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehead, R. G. & Dean, R. F. A. (1964 b). Am. J. clin. Nutr. 14, 320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar