Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-5mhkq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-13T02:33:56.788Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of dietary protein concentration and ambient temperature on the energy, protein and water metabolism of the rat

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 July 2007

M. Harri  and
J. M. Brockway
M. Harri
Affiliation:
Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB2 9SB
J. M. Brockway
Affiliation:
Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB2 9SB
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. Groups of rats (n 8) were offered, to appetite, diets containing 10 (LP), 25 (MP) and 45 (HP)% of gross energy as protein energy from 45 d of age to slaughter 50 d later. At 53 d of age, half the rats on each diet were left at 22°while the other half were transferred to 6°. Water balances were measured daily, and digestibilities of energy and nitrogen and the metabolizability of the diets were measured for each rat over a 7 d period at some stage between the age of 74 and 95 d. The rats were slaughtered at day 95 and their carcasses were analysed for protein, lipid, energy and ash contents. Energy expenditure was calculated as the difference between metabolizable energy intake and energy retained.

2. Growth performance was best on the MP diet at both temperatures. At 22° the rate of gain of body-weight and of energy retention, although not of protein, were slightly reduced on the HP diet while overall performance was markedly inferior on the LP diet. At 6° the LP diet, while not so good as the MP diet, led to significantly better all-round growth performance than did the HP diet. Cold increased the energy expenditure of the rats by 50% (109–138 kJ/d); the increase was greater for the LP group than for the HP group.

3. Intrascapular brown adipose tissue hypertrophied in response to cold and to the LP diet.

4. Adrenal gland size was significantly increased by cold exposure and by increasing level of dietary protein concentration.

5. Urine volume was more closely related to the intake of protein than to that of energy. Urinary N concentration for the HP rats was approximately double that for those on the LP diet. Cold-exposed rats had a high water content in their fat-free carcasses, but there were no differences between the dietary treatments.

Type
Papers on General Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 53 , Issue 2 , March 1985 , pp. 363 - 372
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1985

References

Atkinson, T., Fowler, V. R., Garton, G. A. & Lough, A. K. (1972). Analyst, London 97, 562–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barr, H. G. & McCracken, K. J. (1984). British Journal of Nutrition 51, 379–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bass, J. M. (1982). Animal Production 35, 293–294.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. (1962). The Energy Metabolism of Ruminants. London: Hutchinson, Scientific and Technical.Google Scholar
Brockway, J. M. & Lobley, G. E. (1981). Journal of Physiology 314, 85–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chwalibog, A., Glem-Hansen, N., Henckel, S. & Thorbek, G. (1980). In Energy Metabolism. Proceedings 8th Symposium Energy Metabolism, Cambridge, 1978, pp. 283–286 [Mount, L. E., editor]. London: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Davidson, J., Mathieson, J. & Boyne, A. W. (1970). Analyst London 95, 181–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Degen, A. A. & Young, B. A. (1981). Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 96, 493–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fregly, M. J. (1968). Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology 46, 873–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuller, M. F. & Cadenhead, A. (1969). In Energy Metabolism of Farm Animals, Proceedings 4th Symposium Energy Metabolism, Warsaw, Poland, 1967, pp. 455–460 [Blaxter, K. L., Kielanowski, J. and Thorbek, Grete, editors]. Newcastle upon Tyne: Oriel Press Ltd.Google Scholar
Harri, M. & Korhanen, H. (1984). In Proceedings of 3rd International Scientific Congress on Fur Bearing Animal Production, Versailles, France, p. 21. Paris: INRA and ITAVI.Google Scholar
Henriques, S. B., Henriques, O. B., Selye, H. (1949). Endocrinology 45, 153–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heroux, O. & Gridgeman, N. T. (1958). Canadian Journal of Biochemistry and Physiology 36, 209–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hovell, F. D. DeB., Gordon, J. G. & MacPherson, R. M. (1977). Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 89, 523–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, J. H. (1958). American Journal of Physiology 193, 488–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakatsuka, H., Shoji, Y. & Tsuda, T. (1983). Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology 74A, 21–25Google Scholar
Page, E. & Babineau, L.-M. (1953). Canadian Journal of Medical Science 31, 22–40.Google Scholar
Pullar, J. D. & Webster, A. J. F. (1977). British Journal of Nutrition 37, 355–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radcliffe, J. D. & Webster, A. J. F. (1976). British Journal of Nutrition 36, 457–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radcliffe, J. D. & Webster, A. J. F. (1978). British Journal of Nutrition 39, 483–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radcliffe, J. D. & Webster, A. J. F. (1979). British Journal of Nutrition 41, 111–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rolls, B. J., Rowe, E. A. & Turner, R. C. (1980). Journal of Physiology 298, 415–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothwell, N. J., Stock, M. J. & Warwick, B. B. (1983). International Journal of Obesity 7, 263–276.Google Scholar
Slag, M. F., Ahmed, M., Gannon, M. C. & Nuttall, F. Q. (1981). Metabolism 30, 1104–1108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westra, R. & Christopherson, R. J. (1975). University of Alberta, Feeders Day Report no. 54, p.56.Google Scholar