Fig. 2.

Growth curve of WT and tg/+ Tg-FABP4-RORα4 mice on HFD and measurement of adiposity. (A–D) Average weight gain ± S.E.M of WT (black) and tg/+ (red) mice. Growth curves plotted to compare HFD and chow diet in (A) WT mice and (B) tg/+ mice separately. (C) HFD growth curve on tg/+ mice relative to WT (solid circles, n = 10 littermate pairs) with commencement of HFD at week 17. (D) Parallel growth curve data of WT and tg/+ mice on chow diet (hollow circles, n = 7 littermate pairs). Statistical analyses were performed using two-way ANOVAs with Bonferroni's post-test applied where *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001. Representative images of (E) dissected WT and tg/+ littermate pair at the end of the HFD study (32-week). (F–G) NMR scans were performed on non-fasted live WT and tg/+ littermate pairs (HFD) and represented as the mean ± S.E.M. (F) percentage total body fat and (G) percentage lean mass relative to total body weight from n = 8 littermate pairs of mice. (H) Mean relative mass/total weight ± S.E.M. of adipose tissues dissected from WT and tg/+ littermate pairs after HFD (n = 9 littermate pairs). Statistical analysis was performed using unpaired two-tailed Student's t-test where **P < 0.05. (I–J) Assumption-free correlation analysis of visceral and SAT mass in (I) chow 32-week study (n = 7 littermate pairs) and (J) HFD study (n = 10 littermate pairs). The Pearson correlation R² value reports the fraction of “shared” variance while the P value tests the null hypothesis that there is no linear trend between the groups, where a small P value indicates a statistical significant linear trend.