4.6 Article

Effects of feeding bile acids and a bile acid sequestrant on hepatic bile acid composition in mice

Journal

JOURNAL OF LIPID RESEARCH
Volume 51, Issue 11, Pages 3230-3242

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1194/jlr.M007641

Keywords

gender difference; ultra performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry; bile acid-synthetic enzymes

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [ES-009649, ES-013714, ES-009716, RR-021940]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An improved ultra performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC/MS/MS) method was established for the simultaneous analysis of various bile acids (BA) and applied to investigate liver BA content in C57BL/6 mice fed 1% cholic acid (CA), 0.3% deoxycholic acid (DCA), 0.3% chenodeoxycholic acid (CDCA), 0.3% lithocholic acid (LCA), 3% ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA), or 2% cholestyramine (resin). Results indicate that mice have a remarkable ability to maintain liver BA concentrations. The BA profiles in mouse livers were similar between CA and DCA feedings, as well as between CDCA and LCA feedings. The mRNA expression of Cytochrome P450 7a1 (Cyp7a1) was suppressed by all BA feedings, whereas Cyp7b1 was suppressed only by CA and UDCA feedings. Gender differences in liver BA composition were observed after feeding CA, DCA, CDCA, and LCA, but they were not prominent after feeding UDCA. Sulfation of CA and CDCA was found at the 7-OH position, and it was increased by feeding CA or CDCA more in male than female mice. In contrast, sulfation of LCA and taurolithocholic acid (TLCA) was female-predominant, and it was increased by feeding UDCA and LCA. In summary, the present systematic study on BA metabolism in mice will aid in interpreting BA-mediated gene regulation and hepatotoxicity.-Zhang, Y., and C. D. Klaassen. Effects of feeding bile acids and a bile acid sequestrant on hepatic bile acid composition in mice. J. Lipid Res. 2010. 51: 3230-3242.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available