4.6 Article

Chronic REM-sleep deprivation of rats elevates metabolic rate and increases UCP1 gene expression in brown adipose tissue

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/ajpendo.00543.2004

关键词

rapid eye movement; oxygen consumption; uncoupling protein-1

资金

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [G12-RR-17581-02] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIGMS NIH HHS [2-SO6-GM-51971-04] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A cluster of unique pathologies progressively develops during chronic total- or rapid eye movement-sleep deprivation (REM-SD) of rats. Two prominent and readily observed symptoms are hyperphagia and decline in body weight. For body weight to be lost despite a severalfold increase in food consumption suggests that SD elevates metabolism as the subject enters a state of negative energy balance. To test the hypothesis that mediation of this hypermetabolism involves increased gene expression of uncoupling protein-1 (UCP1), which dissipates the thermodynamic energy of the mitochondrial proton-motive force as heat instead of ATP formation in brown adipose tissue (BAT), we 1) established the time course and magnitude of change in metabolism by measuring oxygen consumption, 2) estimated change in UCP1 gene expression in BAT by RT-PCR and Western blot, and 3) assayed serum leptin because of its role in regulating energy balance and food intake. REM-SD of male Sprague-Dawley rats was enforced for 20 days with the platform (flowerpot) method, wherein muscle atonia during REM sleep causes contact with surrounding water and awakens it. By day 20, rats more than doubled food consumption while losing similar to 11% of body weight; metabolism rose to 166% of baseline with substantial increases in UCP1 mRNA and immunoreactive UCP1 over controls; serum leptin decreased and remained suppressed. The decline in leptin is consistent with the hyperphagic response, and we conclude that one of the mediators of elevated metabolism during prolonged REM-SD is increased gene expression of UCP1 in BAT.

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