4.7 Article

Effects of Dietary Different Doses of Copper and High Fructose Feeding on Rat Fecal Metabolome

期刊

JOURNAL OF PROTEOME RESEARCH
卷 14, 期 9, 页码 4050-4058

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jproteome.5b00596

关键词

GC x GC-TOF MS; metabolomics; nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; fructose; copper

资金

  1. National Institute of Health (NIH) [P30AA019360, R01DK055030, RO1DK071765]
  2. National Science Foundation [DMS-1312603]
  3. Veterans Administration
  4. UofL, Clinical and Translational Pilot Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The gut microbiota plays a critical role in the pathogenesis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Increased fructose consumption and inadequate copper intake are two critical risk factors in the development of NAFLD. To gain insight into the role of gut microbiota, fecal metabolites, obtained from rats exposed to different dietary levels of copper with and without high fructose intake for 4 weeks, were analyzed by comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography time-of-flight mass spectrometry (GC x GC-TOF MS). In parallel, liver tissues were assessed by histology and triglyceride assay. Our data showed that high fructose feeding led to obvious hepatic steatosis in both marginal copper deficient rats and copper supplementation rats. Among the 38 metabolites detected with significant abundance alteration between groups, short chain fatty acids were markedly decreased with excessive fructose intake irrespective of copper levels. C15:0 and C17:0 long chain fatty acids, produced only by bacteria, were increased by either high copper level or high fructose intake. In addition, increased fecal urea and malic acid paralleled the increased hepatic fat accumulation. Collectively, GC x GC-TOF MS analysis of rat fecal samples revealed distinct fecal metabolome profiles associated with the dietary high fructose and copper level, with some metabolites possibly serving as potential noninvasive biomarkers of fructose induced-NAFLD.

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