Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T03:02:05.847Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response of male and female rats to undernutrition

2. Influence of ovariectomy on partition of nutrients by female rats during undernutrition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

Patricia M. Harris ,
R. B. Broadhurst  and
Diane F. Hodgson
Patricia M. Harris
Affiliation:
Applied Biochemistry Division, DSIR, Palmerston North, New Zealand
R. B. Broadhurst
Affiliation:
Applied Biochemistry Division, DSIR, Palmerston North, New Zealand
Diane F. Hodgson
Affiliation:
Applied Biochemistry Division, DSIR, Palmerston North, New Zealand
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. Female Wistar rats (5 and 11 weeks old) were either left intact or ovariectomized. Animals of each age- and treatment-group were either ad lib.-fed or undernourished for 4 weeks.

2. The bodies of all animals were analysed for protein and fat and the weights, lipid synthesis rate and lipoprotein lipase (EC 3.1. 1.34) activity of four fat depots were determined.

3. The well-nourished ovariectomized animals of both age-groups gained weight more rapidly than the well-nourished intact animals of the same age, but there was no effect of ovariectomy on body composition, lipid synthesis rate or lipoprotein lipase activity in either the well-nourished or the undernourished animals of either age-group.

4. There was a greater efficiency of energy utilization found in the ovariectomized animals than in the intact animals regardless of age or nutritional status.

Type
Papers on General Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 52 , Issue 2 , September 1984 , pp. 307 - 317
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1984

References

Dubé, J. Y., Lesage, R. & Tremblay, R. R. (1976). Canadian Journal of Biochemistry 54, 50–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, J. M. & Wade, G. N. (1981). American Journalof Physiology 240, E474–E481.Google Scholar
Hamosh, M. & Hamosh, P. (1975). Journal of Clinical Investigation 55, 1132–1135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, P. M. (1980). British Journal of Nutrition 43, 15–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, P. M., Hodgson, D. F. & Broadhurst, R. B. (1984). British Journal of Nutrition 52, 289–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hietanen, E. & Greenwood, M. R. C. (1977). Journal of Lipid Research 18, 480–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leshner, A. I. & Collier, G. (1973). Physiology and Behaviour 11, 671–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, B. N., McCracken, A., Fur, B. J. A. & MacFie, H. J. H. (1979). Journal of Endocrinology 81, 35–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramirez, I. (1981). American Journal of Physiology 240, E533–E538.Google Scholar
Roy, E. J. & Wade, G. N. (1977). Hormones and Behaviour 8, 265–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slob, A. K. & Bosch, J. J. (1975). Physiology and Behaviour 14, 353–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tan, M. H., Sata, T. & Havel, R. J. (1977). Journal of Lipid Research 18, 363–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tartellin, M. F. & Gorski, R. A. (1973). Acta Endocrinologica 72, 551–568.Google Scholar
Wade, G. N. & Gray, J. M. (1979). Physiology and Behaviour 22, 583–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar