4.4 Article

Species differences in lipoprotein lipase and hepatic lipase activities: comparative studies of animal models of lifestyle-related diseases

Journal

EXPERIMENTAL ANIMALS
Volume 68, Issue 3, Pages 267-275

Publisher

INT PRESS EDITING CENTRE INC
DOI: 10.1538/expanim.18-0176

Keywords

animal model; hepatic triglyceride lipase (HTGL); lipoprotein lipase (LPL); species difference

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Lipoprotein lipase (LPL) and hepatic triglyceride lipase (HTGL) have an important role in lifestyle-related diseases. To evaluate species differences, we compared LPL and HTGL activities in different animal models of lifestyle-related diseases using the same assay kit. Normal animals (JW rabbits, ICR mice, and SD rats), a hypercholesterolemic animal model (WHHLMI rabbits), and obese animal models (KK-A(y) mice and Zucker fatty rats) fed standard chow were used in this study. Plasma was prepared before and after an intravenous injection of heparin sodium under fasting and feeding. LPL and HTGL activities were measured with the LPL/HTGL activity assay kit (Immuno-Biological Laboratories) using an auto-analyzer. Only in mice, high HTGL activity was observed in pre-heparin plasma. In normal animals, LPL and HTGL activities were high in ICR mice and SD rats but low in JW rabbits. Compared to normal animals, LPL activity was high in Zucker fatty rats and WHHLMI rabbits at both fasting and feeding, while LPL activity after feeding was low in KK-A(y) mice. HTGL activity was higher in fasted and fed WHHLMI rabbits and fasted Zucker fatty rats, but was lower in fed KK-A(y) mice. Gender difference was observed in HTGL activity in SD rats and LPL activity in WHHLMI rabbits but not in ICR mice. In conclusion, this simple assay method was effective for measuring LPL and HTGL activities of experimental animals, and the activities are highly regulated depending on animal species, animal models, feeding/fasting conditions and genders.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available