4.7 Article

Tomato Powder Inhibits Hepatic Steatosis and Inflammation Potentially Through Restoring SIRT1 Activity and Adiponectin Function Independent of Carotenoid Cleavage Enzymes in Mice

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mnfr.201700738

关键词

adiponectin; microbiome; nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; sirtuin 1; tomatoes

资金

  1. USDA/NIFA [AFRI 2015-67017-23141]
  2. USDA/ARS [58-1950-51000-074S]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Scope: Beta-carotene-15,15'-oxygenase (BCO1) and beta-carotene-9',10'-oxygenase (BCO2) metabolize lycopene to biologically active metabolites, which can ameliorate nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). We investigate the effects of tomato powder (TP containing substantial lycopene (2.3 mg/g)) on NAFLD development and gut microbiome in the absence of both BCO1 and BCO2 in mice. Method and results: BCO1(-/-)/BCO2(-/-) double knockout mice were fed a high fat diet (HFD) alone (n = 9) or with TP feeding (n = 9) for 24 weeks. TP feeding significantly reduced pathological severity of steatosis and hepatic triglyceride levels in BCO1(-/-)/BCO2(-/-) mice (p < 0.04 vs HFD alone). This was associated with increased SIRT1 activity, nicotinamide phosphoribosyltransferase expression and AMP-activated protein kinase phosphorylation, and subsequently decreased lipogenesis, hepatic fatty acid uptake, and increasing fatty acid beta-oxidation (p < 0.05). TP feeding significantly decreased mRNA expression of proinflammatory genes (tnf-alpha, il-1 beta, and il-6) in both liver and mesenteric adipose tissue, which were associated with increased plasma adiponectin and hepatic adiponectin receptor-2. Multiplexed 16S rRNA gene sequencing was performed using DNA extracted from cecum fecal samples. TP feeding increased microbial richness and decreased relative abundance of the genus Clostridium. Conclusion: Dietary TP can inhibit NAFLD independent of carotenoid cleavage enzymes, potentially through increasing SIRT1 activity and adiponectin production and decreasing Clostridium abundance.

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

4.7
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