4.5 Article

OXIDIZED LIPIDS DID NOT REDUCE LIFESPAN IN THE FRUIT FLY, Drosophila melanogaster

Journal

ARCHIVES OF INSECT BIOCHEMISTRY AND PHYSIOLOGY
Volume 91, Issue 1, Pages 52-63

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/arch.21308

Keywords

lifespan; fructose; glucose; lipid peroxides; drosophila

Funding

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aging is often associated with accumulation of oxidative damage in proteins and lipids. However, some studies do not support this view, raising the question of whether high levels of oxidative damage are associated with lifespan. In the current investigation, Drosophila melanogaster flies were kept on diets with 2 or 10% of either glucose or fructose. The lifespan, fecundity, and feeding as well as amounts of protein carbonyls (PC) and lipid peroxides (LOOH), activities of superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase, glutathione-S-transferase (GST), and glutathione reductase activity of thioredoxin reductase (TrxR) were measured in young (10-day old) and aged (50-day old) flies. Flies maintained on diets with 10% carbohydrate lived longer than those on the 2% diets. However, neither lifespan nor fecundity was affected by the type of carbohydrate. The amount of PC was unaffected by diet and age, whereas flies fed on diets with 10% carbohydrate had about fivefold higher amounts of LOOH compared to flies maintained on the 2% carbohydrate diets. Catalase activity was significantly lower in flies fed on diets with 10% carbohydrates compared to flies on 2% carbohydrate diets. The activities of SOD, GST, and TrxR were not affected by the diet or age of the flies. The higher levels of LOOH in flies maintained on 10% carbohydrate did not reduce their lifespan, from which we infer that oxidative damage to only one class of biomolecules, particularly lipids, is not sufficient to influence lifespan.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available