Skip to main content
. 2000 Jul;68(7):3808–3814. doi: 10.1128/iai.68.7.3808-3814.2000

TABLE 2.

Intestinal cell proliferation in fasted, fasted-refed, or continuously fed sheep

Parametera Feeding groupb Mean ± SE results in:
Ileum Cecum Proximal Central Distal All locations
Labeled cells (no. of cells/crypt) Fasted 40.1 ± 11.8 67.6 ± 7.2 45.8 ± 10.9 22.9 ± 5.0 26.3 ± 8.5 40.5 ± 5.5
Fasted-refed 51.2 ± 13.8 55.2 ± 3.0 63.2 ± 12.3 38.7 ± 9.1 62.9 ± 9.2c 54.2 ± 4.5
Continuously fed 66.4 ± 2.2 65.9 ± 16.1 52.3 ± 4.5e 40.3 ± 14.4 33.6 ± 6.1 51.7 ± 5.6
Crypt height (no. of cells/crypt column) Fasted 79.6 ± 10.0 73.9 ± 6.0 64.8 ± 10.9 70.2 ± 6.8 55.5 ± 2.7 68.8 ± 3.7
Fasted-refed 70.2 ± 1.2 61.8 ± 2.3 61.4 ± 8.1 68.2 ± 4.5 58.0 ± 3.5 63.9 ± 2.1
Continuously fed 88.7 ± 20.6 77.2 ± 13.7 70.4 ± 8.4 84.1 ± 7.4 65.1 ± 4.0 77.1 ± 5.2
Proliferation index (%) Fasted 26.5 ± 8.3 45.5 ± 1.2 34.3 ± 3.0 16.0 ± 2.6 23.5 ± 7.3 29.2 ± 3.4
Fasted-refed 36.8 ± 10.2 44.7 ± 1.8 50.7 ± 5.5 27.9 ± 5.6 53.9 ± 6.0c 42.8 ± 3.5d
Continuously fed 40.9 ± 7.5 42.0 ± 3.9 41.7 ± 0.4e 24.8 ± 8.9 25.6 ± 3.5 34.5 ± 3.2
a

Parameters are as defined in Table 1

b

Fasted animals had feed and water withheld for 48 h, refed animals were fasted and had alfalfa hay for 24 h, and fed animals had continuous daily feeding. 

c

Refed values were higher than fasted or fed values (P = 0.04 for labeled cells and P = 0.017 for proliferation index as determined by one-way ANOVA). 

d

Significant effect of refeeding over all locations (P = 0.024; split-plot ANOVA). 

e

n = 2; in all other cases, n = 3. 

HHS Vulnerability Disclosure