Table 5. Abundance of Fatty Acid Utilisation and Oxidative Phosphorylation Proteins.
Male | Female | Stat | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CON | HF-S | HF-FO | CON | HF-S | HF-FO | |||
CPT1b | EDL | 100 ± 7 | 74 ± 9 | 129 ± 19* # | 104 ± 18 | 91 ± 25 | 199 ± 48* # | DxMMxS |
SOL | 100 ± 22 | 183 ± 20* | 233 ± 18* | 43 ± 5 ^ | 141 ± 13* ^ | 171 ± 29* ^ | ||
PGC1α | EDL | 100 ± 14 | 107 ± 15 | 107 ± 16 | 108 ± 16 | 119 ± 19 | 158 ± 41 | M |
SOL + | 100 ± 8 | 100 ± 9 | 111 ± 7 | 76 ± 8 | 82 ± 6 | 102 ± 10 | ||
PPARα | EDL | 100 ± 16 | 106 ± 15 | 105 ± 16 | 99 ± 12 | 85 ± 7 | 117 ± 19 | M |
SOL + | 100 ± 11 | 78 ± 13 | 92 ± 16 | 78 ± 19 | 80 ± 13 | 87 ± 20 | ||
Complex-I | EDL | 100 ± 21 | 77 ± 40 | 68 ± 21 | 146 ± 43 | 107 ± 28 | 88 ± 30 | M |
SOL + | 100 ± 18 | 64 ± 8 | 33 ± 8 | 49 ± 10 | 61 ± 16 | 28 ± 8 | ||
Complex-II | EDL | 100 ± 10 | 110 ± 24 | 120 ± 23 | 136 ± 32 | 134 ± 22 | 168 ± 34 | M |
SOL + | 100 ± 15 | 94 ± 8 | 109 ± 7 | 88 ± 7 | 103 ± 10 | 105 ± 10 | ||
Complex-III | EDL | 100 ± 27 | 31 ± 7* | 68 ± 13 # | 99 ± 15 | 35 ± 9* | 94 ± 29 # | DxM |
SOL | 100 ± 17 ^ | 60 ± 10 | 53 ± 11 ^ | 55 ± 9 ^ | 60 ± 15 | 53 ± 11 ^ | ||
Complex-IV | EDL | 100 ± 17 | 87 ± 17 | 100 ± 15 | 106 ± 12 | 98 ± 13 | 114 ± 17 | M |
SOL + | 100 ± 8 | 104 ± 2 | 98 ± 8 | 74 ± 7 | 95 ± 6 | 101 ± 9 | ||
Complex-V | EDL | 100 ± 16 | 106 ± 16 | 108 ± 15* | 106 ± 11 | 111 ± 14 | 153 ± 31* | D, M |
SOL + | 100 ± 14 | 145 ± 11 | 148 ± 11* | 69 ± 7 | 130 ± 8 | 151 ± 10* |
Carnitine palmitoyl transferase 1b (CPT1b), peroxisome proliferative activated receptor γ coactivator 1α (PGC1α), peroxisome proliferator activator receptor α (PPARα) and mitochondrial Complex-I to—V protein abundance in extensor digitorum longus (EDL) and soleus (SOL) muscles of male and female mice fed control (CON), high saturated fat (HF-S) or high fat fish oil enriched (HF-FO) diets for 14 wks (Cohort 1).
mRNA contents are expressed as a percentage of the value of male animals under CON diet. Results are mean ± SEM of 6 animals per group. Statistics: Two-way ANOVA: Effect of diet (D):
*P≤0.05, vs CON;
# P≤0.05, compared to HF-S. Effect of muscle type (M):
+ P≤0.05 EDL vs SOL. Effect of sex (S):
‡ P≤0.05, male vs female. Muscle*sex interaction (MxS):
† P≤0.05, male vs female (of same muscle). Diet*muscle (DxM):
^P≤0.05, EDL vs SOL (of same group).