4.6 Article

Inflammatory responses to lipopolysaccharide are suppressed in 40% energy-restricted mice

Journal

JOURNAL OF NUTRITION
Volume 131, Issue 8, Pages 2139-2144

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jn/131.8.2139

Keywords

energy-restricted mice; lipopolysaccharide; proinflammatory cytokines; inducible nitric oxide synthase; glucocorticoids

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To elucidate the suppressive effects of energy restriction on the inflammatory responses to lipopoly-saccharicle (LPS), mice were divided into a control group (fed 5.0 g diet/d; 71 kJ/d) and a 40% energy-restricted group (fed 3.0 g diet/d; 43 kJ/d) at 8-wk of age. Four weeks later, 25 mug of LPS was intraperitoneally injected. After the LPS injection, interleukin-1 beta, interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-a were elevated in serums in the 40% energy-restricted mice and in the controls, but the extent of the elevation was significantly lower in the restricted group. The LPS-induced expression of inducible nitric oxide synthase in the liver was significantly suppressed by the energy restriction. In addition, the LPS-induced elevations of serum aspartate and alanine aminotransferase activities, which are indexes of hepatic injury, were also significantly attenuated in the restricted group. Moreover, the extent of LPS-induced alterations in hepatic structure was less in the restricted mice than in controls. Serum corticosterone level in the restricted mice was higher than that in the controls before LIPS treatment (P < 0.05). Furthermore, after LIPS injection, the significantly higher level of corticosterone was maintained in the restricted mice, although the LPS treatment significantly enhanced the level even in the control group. These results suggest that the extreme inflammatory responses to endotoxin are prevented in the 40% energy-restricted mice, and corticosterone participates in the preventive effects.

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