4.0 Article

Dietary fats modify vascular fat composition, eNOS localization within lipid rafts and vascular function in obesity

期刊

PHYSIOLOGICAL REPORTS
卷 6, 期 15, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.14814/phy2.13820

关键词

Caveolae; caveolin-1; cyclooxygenase; lipid raft; nitric oxide synthase

资金

  1. Department of Veterans Affairs [RX000889-06]
  2. VA Merit Award [BX000543-08]
  3. Iowa City VA Health Care System, Iowa City, IA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We tested whether dietary fatty acids alter membrane composition shifting localization of signaling pathways within caveolae to determine their role in vascular function. Wild type (WT) and caveolin-1-deficient mice (cav-1 KO), required for vascular caveolae formation, were fed low fat (LF), high saturated fat (HF, 60% kcal from lard), or high-fat diet with 50:50 lard and n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid-enriched menhaden oil (MO). HF and MO increased body weight and fat in WT but had less effect in cav-1 KO. MO increased unsaturated fatty acids and the unsaturation index of aorta from WT and cav-1 KO. In LF WT aorta, endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS) was localized to cav-1-enriched low-density fractions which shifted to actin-enriched high-density fractions with acetylcholine (ACh). HF and MO shifted eNOS to high-density fractions in WT aorta which was not affected by ACh. In cav-1 KO aorta, eNOS was localized in low-density non-caveolar fractions but not shifted by ACh or diet. Inducible NOS and cyclooxygenase 1/2 were not localized in low-density fractions or affected by diet, ACh or genotype. ACh-induced dilation of gracilis arteries from HF WT was similar to dilation in LF but the NOS component was reduced. In WT and cav-1 KO, dilation to ACh was enhanced by MO through increased role for NOS and cyclooxygenase. We conclude that dietary fats affect vascular fatty acid composition and membrane localization of eNOS but the contribution of eNOS and cyclooxygenase in ACh-mediated vascular responses is independent of lipid rafts.

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

4.0
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