Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T03:00:37.969Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Heat loss and energy retention during growth in congenitally obese and lean rats

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

J. D. Pullar  and
A. J. F. Webster
J. D. Pullar
Affiliation:
Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB2 9SB
A. J. F. Webster
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. Heat losses associated with the utilization of metabolizable energy for synthesis of protein and of fat during growth were studied in Zucker rats selected for normal leanness or congenital obesity.

2. Measurements of energy and nitrogen balance were made on groups of four lean and four fat rats offered food ad lib. and kept at 22°. Balance trials were also conducted on groups of fat or lean rats offered restricted amounts of food at two levels and kept at 22° or 28°. The medium rations offered to fat and lean rats were the same. The energy and N contents of fat and lean rats were determined by carcass analysis at 35 d and at about 90 d of age.

3. At ad lib. intake, fat rats ate 38% more than lean rats. Heat losses and N balance were similar. When fat and lean rats were pair-fed, heat loss and N retention were lower in fat rats. Absolute values and changes during growth of heat loss (kJ/rat per 24 h) were closely correlated with values obtained for N balance.

4. Carcass analysis showed that energy retention in protein was, on average, 75% in lean rats but only 14% in fat rats. Estimates of energy retention from slaughter experiments and balance trials agreed well, but marked discrepancies existed between the different estimates of N retention.

5. The net efficiencies of utilization of metabolizable energy for growth in lean and fat rats were 0.485 and 0.614 respectively. The energetic efficiencies of net protein synthesis and net fat synthesis were estimated to be 43 and 65% respectively.

6. The interactions between appetite, growth and activity in the development of obesity in the Zucker rat are discussed.

Type
General Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 31 , Issue 3 , May 1974 , pp. 377 - 392
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1974

References

REFERENCES

Agricultural Research Council (1965). The Nutrient Requirements of Livestock No. 2, Ruminants. London: Agricultural Research Council.Google Scholar
Arnal, M., Fauconneau, G. & Pech, R. (1972). Annls Biol. anim. Biochim. Biophys. 12, 91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. (1962). The Energy Metabolism of Ruminants. London: Hutchinson Scientitic and Technical.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Clapperton, J. L. & Wainman, F. W. (1966). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 67, 67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bray, G. A. (1969). Experientia 25, 1100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bray, G. A. & York, D. A. (1971). Physiol. Rev. 51, 598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bray, G. A., York, D. A. & Swerloff, R. S. (1973). Metabolism 22, 435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breirem, K. (1939). Biedermanns Zbl. Tierernähr. 11, 487.Google Scholar
Brobeck, J. R. (1960). Recent Prog. Horm. Hes. 16, 439.Google Scholar
Duncan, D. L. (1966). In Recent Advances in Animal Nutrition p. 51 [Abrams, J. T., editor]. London: Churchill.Google Scholar
Fábry, P. (1967). Handbook of Physiology Section 6, Alimentary Canal Vol. 1, Ch. 3 [Code, C. F., editor]. Washington, DC: American Physiological Society.Google Scholar
James, W. P. T. (1972). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 31, 225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kielanoluksi, J. (1965). Publs Eur. Ass. Anim. Prod. No. 11, p. 13.Google Scholar
Kielanowski, J. & Kotarbinska, M. (1970). Publs Eur. Ass. Anim. Prod. No. 13, p. 145.Google Scholar
Leveille, G. A. (1972). Nutr. Rev. 30, 151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, N. B. & Mayer, J. (1954). Am. J. Physiol. 178, 271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCracken, K. J. (1973). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 32, 66A.Google Scholar
Milligan, L. P. (1971). Fedn Proc. Fedn Am. Socs exp. Biol. 30, 1454.Google Scholar
Mount, L. E. (1968). The Climatic Physiology of the Pig. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Nehring, K. (1969). Publs Eur. Ass. Anim. Prod. No. 12, p. 5.Google Scholar
Ørskov, E. R. & McDonald, I. (1970). Publs Eur. Ass. Anim. Prod. No. 13, p. 133.Google Scholar
Oslage, H. J., Gädeken, D. & Fliegel, H. (1970). Publs Eur. Ass. Anim. Prod. No. 13, p. 133.Google Scholar
Pullar, J. D. (1969). In International Encyclopedia of Food and Nutrition Vol. 17, Nutrition of Animals of Agricultural Importance Part 1, p. 471 [Cuthbertson, D., editor]. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Pulla, J. D. & Webster, A. J. F. (1973). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 32, 19A.Google Scholar
Schiemann, R. (1970). Wiss. Z. Humboldt-Univ. Berl., Math.-nuturuiss. Reihe 19, 35.Google Scholar
Subrahmanyam, K. (1960). Biochem. J. 76, 548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorbek, G. (1970). Publs Eur. Ass. Anim. Prod. No. 13, p. 129.Google Scholar
Verstegen, M. W. A. (1971). Meded. LandbHoogesch. Wageningen p. 71.Google Scholar
Waterlotv, J. C. (1969). In Mammalian Protein Metabolism Vol. 3, p. 361 [Munro, H. N., editor]. London and New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Weiss, P. & Kavanau, J. L. (1957). J. gen. Physiol. 41, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
York, D. A. & Bray, G. A. (1972). Endomnology, 90, 885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
York, D. A., Hershmann, J. M., Utiger, R. D. & Bray, G. A. (1972). Endocrinology 90, 67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zucker, L. M. (1967). J. Nutr. 91, 247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zucker, L. M. & Antoniades, H. N. (1970). Fedn Proc. Fedn Am. Socs exp. Biol. 29, 379.Google Scholar
Zucker, L. M. & Zucker, T. F. (1961). J. Hered. 52, 275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar