Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-5r2nc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-05T01:06:00.527Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of early-life undernutrition in artificially reared rats: subsequent body and organ growth

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

J. L. Smart ,
R. F. Massey ,
S. C. Nash  and
J. Tonkiss
J. L. Smart
Affiliation:
Department of Child Health, University of Manchester, The Medical School, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT
R. F. Massey
Affiliation:
Department of Child Health, University of Manchester, The Medical School, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT
S. C. Nash
Affiliation:
Department of Child Health, University of Manchester, The Medical School, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT
J. Tonkiss
Affiliation:
Department of Child Health, University of Manchester, The Medical School, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT
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. Four groups of rat pups were reared: mother-reared (MR) control (well-fed) and undernourished (MRC and MRU respectively) and artificially reared (AR) control and undernourished (ARC and ARU respectively). Pups for artificial rearing were fitted with a gastric cannula on postnatal day 5 and were fed, by intermittent gastric infusion, expressed rats′ milk (days 5–7), mixtures of rats′ milk and milk-substitute (days 8–16), and milk-substitute only (days 17–20). Solid food was available to MR pups throughout and to AR pups from day 14. Undernutrition, imposed from postnatal days 5 to 25, was effected initially by underfeeding the mother (MRU) or by infusing restricted quantities of milk (ARU). Weaning was at 21 d and undernutrition from day 21 to day 25 was by restricting the supply of solid food. All rats were fed ad lib. from 25 d.

2. The developmental milestone, eye-opening, was delayed by undernutrition but unaffected by artificial rearing.

3. Growth curves in body-weight during the refeeding phase were influenced most by previous undernutrition and to a lesser extent (also negatively) by artificial rearing.

4. Fourteen measures of body and organ growth were taken at autopsy at 39 weeks. Twelve measures were affected by nutrition and only four by rearing (weight of whole body, epididymal fat pads, renal fat pads and adrenals).

5. AR rats had lighter epididymal and renal fat pads than MR rats perhaps due to the low fat content of the expressed milk they received early in artificial rearing.

Type
Clinical and Human Nutrition papers: Other Studies Relevant to Human Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 58 , Issue 2 , September 1987 , pp. 245 - 255
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1987

References

REFERENCES

Dobbing, J. (1981). In The Molecular Basis of Neuropathology, pp. 221–233 [Thompson, R. H. S. and Davison, A. N., editors]. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Dobbing, J. & Sands, J. (1971). Biology of the Neonate 19, 363–378.Google Scholar
Gordon, H. A. & Pesti, L. (1971). Bacteriological Reviews 35, 390–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, W. G. (1975). Science, New York 190, 1313–1315.Google Scholar
Keen, C. L., Lönnerdal, B., Clegg, M. & Hurley, L. S. (1981). Journal of Nutrition 111, 226–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, G. C. (1957). Journal of Endocrinology 16, 9–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levine, S. & Wiener, S. (1976). Advances in Pediatrics 22, 113–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messer, M., Thoman, E. B., Terrasa, A. G. & Dallman, P. R. (1969). Journal of Nutrition 98, 404–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naismith, D. J., Mittwoch, A. & Platt, B. S. (1969). British Journal of Nutrition 23, 683–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smart, J. L. (1980). Developmental Psychobiology 13, 431–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smart, J. L., Adlard, B. P. F. & Dobbing, J. (1974). Biology of the Neonate 25, 135–150.Google Scholar
Smart, J. L., Dobbing, J., Adlard, B. P. F., Lynch, A. & Sands, J. (1973). Journal of Nutrition 103, 1327–1338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smart, J. L., Stephens, D. N. & Katz, H. B. (1983). British Journal of Nutrition 49, 497–506.Google Scholar
Smart, J. L., Stephens, D. N., Tonkiss, J., Auestad, N. S. & Edmond, J. (1984). British Journal of Nutrition 52, 227–237.Google Scholar
Smart, J. L. & Tonkiss, J. (1985). Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 44, 100A.Google Scholar
Smart, J. L., Tonkiss, J. & Massey, R. F. (1987). Neuroscience Letters Supplement 29 S105.Google Scholar
Stephens, D. N. (1980). British Journal of Nutrition 44, 215–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tonkiss, J., Smart, J. L., Auestad, N. S. & Edmond, J. (1985). Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition 4, 818–825.Google Scholar
Tonkiss, J., Smart, J. L. & Massey, R. F. (1987). British Journal of Nutrition 57, 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
University of Manchester Regional Computer Centre (1982). Statistical Package for the Social Sciences Additional Procedures, 5. Version 8 on the CDC 7600.Google Scholar
Whatson, T. S. & Smart, J. L. (1978). Physiology and Behavior 20, 749–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widdowson, E. M. & McCance, R. A. (1960). Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 152, 188–206.Google Scholar
Williams, J. P. G., Tanner, J. M. & Hughes, P. C. R. (1974). Pediatric Research 8, 149–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winick, M. & Noble, A. (1966). Journal of Nutrition 89, 300–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar