4.5 Article

Karaya root saponin exerts a hypocholesterolemic response in rats fed a high-cholesterol diet

期刊

NUTRITION RESEARCH
卷 29, 期 5, 页码 350-354

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.nutres.2009.05.008

关键词

Karaya root saponin; Cholesterol; Triacylglycerol; Atherogenic index; Rat

资金

  1. Matsumoto Institute of Microorganisms, Matsumoto, Japan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Different sources of saponins are known to have hypocholesterolemic activity with varying degrees of efficacy. We hypothesize that karaya root saponin would efficiently reduce cholesterol. The aim of this study is to examine the comparative hypocholesterolemic effect of karaya root saponin in rats fed a high-cholesterol diet. Sixty male Wister-Imamichi rats were divided into 5 groups of 12 rats each constituting of the following: control group, soybean saponin-supplemented group, karaya root saponin-supplemented group, quillaja saponin-supplemented group, and tea saponin-supplemented group. Compared with the control diet, both the karaya root- and quillaja saponin-supplemented diets significantly reduced (P < .05) serum cholesterol and atherogenic index. Karaya root saponin significantly increased the serum high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol/cholesterol ratio, and fecal cholesterol concentrations (P < .05). The triacylglycerol concentration was significantly reduced only in the quillaja saponin-supplemented rats (P < .05). All the tea, soybean, karaya root, and quillaja saponins significantly reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and the greatest reduction was observed with karaya root saponin. Highest fecal bile acid concentration was found with quillaja saponin, whereas highest liver bile acid concentration was observed with karaya root saponin-supplemented rats (P < .05). These results collectively suggest that karaya root saponin can efficiently reduce serum cholesterol concentration in rats. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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