Skip to main content
. 2015 Mar 24;10(3):e0121062. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121062

Table 2. Rodent study: Degree of obesity and glucose tolerance for the 4 diet-interventions.

Study Obesity Glucose tolerance test
Delta body weight (g) End body weight (g) Total AUC for glucose Total AUC for insulin
mmol.l-1.min % increase ng.ml-1.min % increase
Rat studies
HF 45% CON (n = 8) 323 ± 32 430 ± 34 999 ± 138 463 ± 134
HF (n = 7) 377 ± 61 * 480 ± 69 $ 1038 ± 127 4 533 ± 246 15
HF 60% CON (n = 9) 334 ± 48 486 ± 57 1144 ± 186 171 ± 74
HF (n = 9) 390 ± 44 * 545 ± 47 * 1397 ± 305 $ 22 293 ± 139 * 71
CAF a CON (n = 11) 255 ± 14 490 ± 47 579 ± 29 185 ± 28
CAF (n = 11) 305 ± 10* 548 ± 55 * 721 ± 44 * 25 443 ± 39 * 139
Mouse study
HF 70%a CON (n = 8) 3.9 ± 1.0 21.6 ± 1.9 168 ± 68
HF (n = 8) 6.1 ± 1.1 * 23.1 ± 1.5 304 ± 127 * 81 not available
HF + ex (n = 6) 4.7 ± 1.3 ** 20.7 ± 1.4** 280 ± 71 * 67

Values are expressed as mean ± SD.

* p<0.05 versus CON,

** p<0.05 HF+ex versus HF and

$ p<0.1 versus CON.

Underlined % increase (compared to CON) are significant with p<0.05.

aData from the CAF and HF 70% study are obtained from respectively Vaisy et al. (27) and Deldicque et al.(28).

Abbreviations: CON: control group, HF: high-fat group, CAF: cafeteria group, HF+ex: high-fat+exercise group.