Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-14T17:29:11.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The development of obesity in preweanling obob mice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 July 2007

P. L. Thurlby  and
P. Trayhurn
P. L. Thurlby
Affiliation:
Dunn Nutrition Unit, University of Cambridge and Medical Research Council, Milton Road, Cambridge CB4 1XJ
P. Trayhurn
Affiliation:
Dunn Nutrition Unit, University of Cambridge and Medical Research Council, Milton Road, Cambridge CB4 1XJ
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. The body compositions of obob and lean (ob+ and + +) mice at 10, 12, 17 and 28 d of age were investigated using a ‘cold stress’ test to identify the two groups.

2. At each of these ages the obob mice were found to contain significantly more fat than the lean. At 10 d 20 % more fat was present and by 17 d the increase was 72 %. The obob mice at 28 d contained nearly three times as much fat as the lean.

3. Carcass energy was significantly higher in obob mice at all ages investigated.

4. Other changes in body composition found in the 28 d obob mice, i.e. a reduction in total carcass nitrogen and water content, were already established in the 17-d-old mice but differences at 10 and 12 d were not apparent.

5. The livers of obob mice were significantly heavier than those from lean control mice at 28 d but no differences were detected at the earlier ages.

6. The results are discussed with reference to the early origin of obesity in obob mice.

Type
Papers on General Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 39 , Issue 2 , March 1978 , pp. 397 - 402
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1978

References

REFERENCES

Bergen, W. G., Kaplan, M. L., Merkel, R. A. & Leveille, G. A. (1975). Am. J. clin. Nutr. 28, 157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bunyan, J., Murrell, E. A. & Shah, P. P. (1976). Br. J. Nutr. 35, 25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chlouverakis, C., Dade, E. F. & Batt, R. A. L. (1970). Metabolism 19, 687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubuc, P. U. (1976). Metabolism 25, 1567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joosten, H. F. P. & Van der Kroon, P. H. W. (1974). Metabolism 23, 59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, M. L. & Leveille, G. A. (1974). Am. J. Physiol. 227, 912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Southgate, D. A. T. (1971). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 22, 590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trayhurn, P., Thurlby, P. L. & James, W. P. T. (1977). Nature, Lond. 266, 60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, R. (1973). Technicon International Division Technical Report No. 6. Geneva: Technicon International Division.Google Scholar