. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Oct 1.

Published in final edited form as: Metabolomics. 2015 Feb 13;11(5):1287–1301. doi: 10.1007/s11306-015-0786-7

Table 3.

VIP significant metabolites that were also t test significant (p < 0.05) in the three comparisons made in this study, along with the related matched pathways from pathway enrichment analysis

Comparison	Metabolite (p value)	Pathway (hits)	p value
Control 1 versus Brg1/Brm double mutant	Oleic acid (0.005)	Biosynthesis of unsaturated fatty acids (2)	0.0009
	Linoleic acid (0.008)	Linoleic acid metabolism (1)	0.0080
		Fatty acid biosynthesis (1)	0.0598^a
Control 2 versus Brg1/Brm double mutant	Alanine (0.005)	Biosynthesis of unsaturated fatty acids (2)	0.0049
	Oleic acid (0.010)	Linoleic acid metabolism (1)	0.0168
	Linoleic acid (0.0014)	Ascorbate and aldarate metabolism (1)	0.0252
	Myoinositol (0.0021)	Galactose metabolism (1)	0.0715^a
		Inositol phosphate metabolism (1)	0.0768^a
		Fatty acid biosynthesis (1)	0.1161^a
Control 1 & 2 versus Brg1/Brm double mutant	Oleic acid (0.007)	Biosynthesis of unsaturated fatty acids (2)	0.0081
	Linoleic acid (0.010)	Linoleic acid metabolism (1)	0.0210
	Fructose-6-phosphate (0.016)	Amino sugar and nucleotide sugar metabolism (1)	0.1241^a
	Creatinine (0.017)	Fatty acid biosynthesis (1)	0.1429^a
	Alanine (0.033)

VIP significance was based on the analysis of Control group 1 (Flx/Flx, No Brg1 Tg, Chow+tamoxifen, N = 3), Control Group 2 (Flx/Flx, Brg1 Tg+, Chow diet − no tamoxifen, N = 3), Control Groups 1 & 2 (Flx/Flx, No Brg1 Tg, Chow+tamoxifen AND Flx/Flx, Brg1 Tg+, Chow diet − no tamoxifen, N = 6), and Brg1/Brm Double Mutant (Chow+tamoxifen, N = 5) hearts

Not significant