Table 1.
Effects of vitamin A supplementation on biometric parameters in WNIN/Ob rats
| Parameters | Lean | Obese | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI | AII | AIII | AIV | BI | BII | BIII | BIV | |
| Initial body wt. (g) | 352 ± 13.3a | 374 ± 8.2a | 351 ± 21.8a | 362 ± 24.9a | 628 ± 48.3b | 594 ± 36.4b | 574 ± 27.9b | 591 ± 12.9b |
| Final body wt. (g) | 424 ± 19.8a | 455 ± 7.1a | 441 ± 19.2a | 454 ± 13.3a | 926 ± 56.2b | 883 ± 38.9bc | 811 ± 33.4cd | 778 ± 23.8d |
| Body wt. gain (g) | 72 ± 18.9a | 80 ± 10.1a | 90 ± 25.1a | 92 ± 15.9a | 298 ± 22.1b | 288 ± 10.9bc | 237 ± 20.8cd | 189 ± 17.2d |
| Food intake (g/day) | 18.9 ± 0.57a | 17 .4 ± 0.68a | 19.4 ± 2.15a | 18.8 ± 0.86a | 27.9 ± 0.82b | 29.3 ± 1.06b | 28.1 ± 1.33b | 26.8 ± 0.60b |
| Lean body mass (g) | 361 ± 14.9a | 398 ± 8.3a | 389 ± 15.0a | 402 ± 11.1a | 410 ± 26.9a | 399 ± 17.6a | 376 ± 15.1a | 362 ± 9.1a |
| Total body fat (g) | 63 ± 5.6a | 57 ± 3.2a | 52 ± 5.6a | 52 ± 4.8a | 516 ± 30.8b | 481 ± 15.5b | 435 ± 18.5c | 416 ± 15.3c |
| Fat%* | 14.6 ± 0.75a | 12.6 ± 0.77b | 11.7 ± 0.90b | 11.4 ± 0.84b | 55.8 ± 0.69c | 54.7 ± 0.40cd | 53.7 ± 0.22d | 53.4 ± 0.44d |
| rWAT ϕ | 1.2 ± 0.07a | 1.3 ± 0.23a | 1.1 ± 0.19a | 1.5 ± 0.19a | 9.4 ± 1.02b | 8.1 ± 0.19bd | 7.6 ± 1.22cd | 6.4 ± 0.45c |
| eWAT@ | 0.8 ± 0.22ac | 0.7 ± 0.06ac | 0.6 ± 0.05ac | 0.7 ± 0.08ac | 1.5 ± 0.26b | 1.4 ± 0.35bd | 0.9 ± 0.08cd | 1.0 ± 0.12abc |
| Rectal temperature (°C) | 37.6 ± 0.03ae | 37.6 ± 0.31ae | 37.6 ± 0.31ae | 37.6 ± 0.22ae | 36.0 ± 0.19b | 37.7 ± 0.18a | 38.3 ± 0.21cd | 37.7 ± 0.12ce |
Five-month-old male lean (A) and obese (B) rats were fed vitamin A at a dose of 2.6 (I), 26 (II), 52 (III) and 129 (IV) mg/kg diet for a period of 20 weeks. AI served as the control group for lean phenotype, while BI was control group for obese phenotype. Data are mean ± SE (n=8 for AI, AII, AIII, AIV; n=7 for BI, BII, BIV; n=6 for BIII). LBM, lean body mass; FAT%, fat percentage; eWAT, epididymal WAT; rWAT, retroperitoneal WAT.
a–e Mean values within a row not sharing a common superscript were significantly different by oneway ANOVA and LSD post hoc comparison (P < 0.05). *Total body fat expressed as a percentage of body weight. ϕMass of rWAT expressed as a percentage of body weight. @Mass of eWAT expressed as a percentage of body weight.