4.6 Article

Reduced Body Weight and Increased Energy Expenditure in Transgenic Mice Over-Expressing Soluble Leptin Receptor

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 5, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0011669

关键词

-

资金

  1. American Heart Association, Texas Affiliate [0255737Y]
  2. Welch Foundation [I-1470]
  3. National Institutes of Health [DK 60137]
  4. A*STAR Biomedical Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Soluble leptin receptor (OBRe), one of several leptin receptor isoforms, is the only bona fide leptin binding protein in plasma. Our earlier studies demonstrated that OBRe modulates leptin levels in circulation. Both clinical and in vitro studies have shown that OBRe expression is inversely correlated to body weight and leptin levels. However, it is not clear whether OBRe plays an active role, either in collaboration with leptin or independently, in the maintenance of body weight. Methodology/Principal Findings: To investigate the function of OBRe in the regulation of energy homeostasis, we generated transgenic mice that express OBRe under the control of human serum amyloid P (hSAP) component gene promoter. The transgene led to approximately doubling of OBRe in circulation in the transgenic mice than in wild type control mice. Transgenic mice exhibited lower body weight at 4 weeks of age, and slower rate of weight gain when compared with control mice. Furthermore, transgenic mice had lower body fat content. Indirect calorimetry revealed that transgenic mice had reduced food intake, increased basal metabolic rate, and increased lipid oxidation, which could account for the differences in body weight and body fat content. Transgenic mice also showed higher total circulating leptin, with the majority of it being in the bound form, while the amount of free leptin is comparable between transgenic and control mice. Conclusions: These results are consistent with the role of OBRe as a leptin binding protein in regulating leptin's bioavailability and activity.

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