4.7 Article

Superior hypoglycemic activity of mulberry lacking monosaccharides is accompanied by better activation of the PI3K/Akt and AMPK signaling pathways

期刊

FOOD & FUNCTION
卷 11, 期 5, 页码 4249-4258

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d0fo00427h

关键词

-

资金

  1. Innovation Teams of Modern Agricultural Industry Technology System in Guangdong Province [2019KJ117, 2019KJ124]
  2. Key Research and Development Program of Guangdong Province [2019B020213001]
  3. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2019M662826]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mulberry has been used as a functional food to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, it contains relatively high levels of fructose and glucose, which are not suitable for excess consumption by diabetic patients. In this study we used microbial fermentation to remove fructose and glucose from mulberry fruit, and then determined the effects on glycemia, the phosphatidylinositol 3-hydroxykinase/Akt (PI3K/Akt) and adenosine monophosphate-activated protein kinase (AMPK) signaling pathways and their downstream effectors in T2DM mice. After 5 weeks of administration, fermented mulberry (FM) significantly reduced fasting blood glucose, and also improved insulin sensitivity and glucose tolerance, more effectively than unfermented mulberry (MP). Moreover, compared with MP, FM had a more marked effect on the protein expression of intermediates in the PI3K/Akt and AMPK signaling pathways and their effectors: insulin receptor, phosphorylated Akt (Ser 308), phosphorylated glycogen synthase kinase-3 beta (Ser 9), glycogen synthetase, phosphorylated forkhead transcription factor 1 (Ser 256), pyruvate carboxylase, phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase, fructose-1, 6-bisphosphatase, glucose-6-phosphatase, lipoprotein lipase, and phosphorylated AMPK (Thr 172), glucose transporter 4 and pyruvate kinase. These findings indicate that mulberry fruit modified to remove fructose and glucose may be more promising than whole mulberry as a treatment for diabetes.

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