4.6 Article

Vitamin A Deficiency Increases Protein Catabolism and Induces Urea Cycle Enzymes in Rats

期刊

JOURNAL OF NUTRITION
卷 140, 期 4, 页码 792-798

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.3945/jn.109.119388

关键词

-

资金

  1. Fondo de Investigacion Sanitaria, Spain [FIS-05/2534]
  2. Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional, U. Europea

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chronic vitamin A deficiency induces a substantial delay in the rates of weight and height gain in both humans and experimental animals. This effect has been associated with an impaired nutrient metabolism and loss of body protein. Therefore, we analyzed the effect of vitamin A deficiency on endogenous proteolysis and nitrogen metabolism and its reversibility with all-trans retinoic acid (RA). Male weanling rats, housed in pairs, were pair-fed a vitamin A-deficient (VAD) or control diet until they were 60 d old. A group of deficient rats were further treated with daily intraperitoneal injections of all-trans RA for 10 d. Final body and tissue (i.e. liver and heart) weights were significantly lower and tissue:body weight ratios were similar in VAD rats and in controls. Conversely, the epididymal white fat:body weight ratio and the plasma concentrations of alanine aminotransferase and adiponectin were significantly higher in VAD rats, which also had hepatic macrovesicular lipid accumulations. Plasma and gastrocnemius muscle 3-methylhistidine, urine nitrogen, and plasma and urine urea concentrations were all significantly higher in the VAD group. The expression of the genes encoding urea cycle enzymes and their activities increased in VAD livers. These changes were partially reverted by all-trans RA. We propose that fuel partitioning in vitamin A deficiency may shift from fatty acids to protein catabolism as an energy source. Our results emphasize the importance of vitamin A on the energy balance control system and they provide an explanation for the role of vitamin A in protein turnover, development, and growth. J. Nutr. 140: 792-798, 2010.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据