4.6 Article

Characterization of Lipid Profiles after Dietary Intake of Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids Using Integrated Untargeted and Targeted Lipidomics

期刊

METABOLITES
卷 9, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/metabo9100241

关键词

arachidonic acid; omega-3 fatty acids; lipidomics; mass spectrometry; dietary fat; fatty acid metabolism

资金

  1. JSPS KAKENHI [15H05897, 15H05898, 18H02432, 18K19155]
  2. JST National Bioscience Database Center (NBDC)
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [18K19155, 18H02432] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Illuminating the comprehensive lipid profiles after dietary supplementation of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) is crucial to revealing the tissue distribution of PUFAs in living organisms, as well as to providing novel insights into lipid metabolism. Here, we performed lipidomic analyses on mouse plasma and nine tissues, including the liver, kidney, brain, white adipose, heart, lung, small intestine, skeletal muscle, and spleen, with the dietary intake conditions of arachidonic acid (ARA), eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) as the ethyl ester form. We incorporated targeted and untargeted approaches for profiling oxylipins and complex lipids such as glycerol (phospho) lipids, sphingolipids, and sterols, respectively, which led to the characterization of 1026 lipid molecules from the mouse tissues. The lipidomic analysis indicated that the intake of PUFAs strongly impacted the lipid profiles of metabolic organs such as the liver and kidney, while causing less impact on the brain. Moreover, we revealed a unique lipid modulation in most tissues, where phospholipids containing linoleic acid were significantly decreased in mice on the ARA-supplemented diet, and bis(monoacylglycero)phosphate (BMP) selectively incorporated DHA over ARA and EPA. We comprehensively studied the lipid profiles after dietary intake of PUFAs, which gives insight into lipid metabolism and nutrition research on PUFA supplementation.

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