4.7 Article

Resveratrol treatment in mice does not elicit the bradycardia and hypothermia associated with calorie restriction

期刊

FASEB JOURNAL
卷 23, 期 4, 页码 1032-1040

出版社

FEDERATION AMER SOC EXP BIOL
DOI: 10.1096/fj.08-115923

关键词

obesity; dieting; body temperature; heart rate

资金

  1. U.S. National Institutes of Health [R15 HL081101-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dietary supplementation with resveratrol may produce calorie restriction-like effects on metabolic and longevity endpoints in mice. In this study, we sought to determine whether resveratrol treatment elicited other hallmark changes associated with calorie restriction, namely bradycardia and decreased body temperature. We found that during short-term treatment, wild-type mice on a calorie-restricted diet experienced significant decreases in both heart rate and body temperature after only 1 day whereas those receiving resveratrol exhibited no such change after 1 wk. We also used ob/ob mice to study the effects of long-term treatment because previous studies had indicated the therapeutic value of resveratrol against the linked morbidities of obesity and diabetes. After 12 wk, resveratrol treatment had produced no changes in either heart rate or body temperature. Strikingly, and in contrast to previous findings, we found that resveratrol-treated mice had significantly reduced endurance in a treadmill test. Quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction suggested that a proposed target of resveratrol, Sirt1, was activated in resveratrol-treated ob/ob mice. Thus, we conclude that the bradycardia and hypothermia associated with calorie restriction occur through mechanisms unaffected by the actions of resveratrol and that further studies are needed to examine the differential effects of resveratrol in a leptin-deficient background.-Mayers, J. R., Iliff, B. W., Swoap, S. J. Resveratrol treatment in mice does not elicit the bradycardia and hypothermia associated with calorie restriction. FASEB J. 23, 1032-1040 (2009)

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