Table 1.
Gene Name | Catalog # | Female | Male | Statistics (two-way ANOVA) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sham | VSG | Sham | VSG | |||
Lipid metabolism | ||||||
ACOX1 | Rn01460628_m1 | 100 ± 7a | 75 ± 5b | 91 ± 3 | 94 ± 7 | p (surgery × sex) < 0.05 |
CD36 | Rn01442639_m1 | 100 ± 10a | 49 ± 6b | 2 ± 1c | 4 ± 1c | p (surgery × sex) < 0.001 |
CPT1A | Rn00580702_m1 | 100 ± 9 | 72 ± 11 | 90 ± 6 | 79 ± 12 | NS |
DGAT2 | Rn00584870_m1 | 100 ± 6a | 73 ± 6b | 54 ± 4b | 53.1 ± 4b | p (surgery × sex) < 0.05 |
FASN | Rn00569117_m1 | 100 ± 12 | 70 ± 11 | 17 ± 5 | 14 ± 2 | p (sex) < 0.001 |
LDLR | Rn00598442_m1 | 100 ± 8a | 64 ± 5c | 29 ± 3b | 31 ± 3b | p (surgery × sex) < 0.01; |
MGAT | Rn00585985_s1 | 100 ± 4 | 82 ± 6 | 68 ± 5 | 67 ± 6 | p (sex) < 0.001 |
PGC1 | Rn00590984_m1 | 100 ± 12 | 104 ± 12 | 35 ± 3 | 68 ± 7 | p (sex) < 0.001 |
PPARα | Rn00566193_m1 | 100 ± 9 | 59 ± 8 | 106 ± 10 | 102 ± 11 | p (sex) < 0.05, p (surgery) < 0.05, |
PPARγ | Rn00440945_m1 | 100 ± 13 | 67 ± 10 | 85 ± 13 | 75 ± 11 | p(surgery) < 0.05 |
SREBP | Rn01495769_m1 | 100 ± 6 | 68 ± 7 | 70 ± 10 | 58 ± 5 | p (surgery) < 0.05, p (sex) < 0.01 |
Cholesterol Metabolism | ||||||
ACAT2 | Rn01759928_g1 | 100 ± 11a | 66 ± 7b | 20 ± 1c | 21 ± 3c | p (surgery × sex) < 0.05; |
CYP7a1 | Rn00564065_m1 | 100 ± 24 | 85 ± 11 | 40 ± 7 | 44 ± 15 | p (sex) < 0.001 |
MTTP | Rn01522970_m1 | 100 ± 7a | 64 ± 5b | 35 ± 2c | 37 ± 3c | p (surgery × sex) < 0.001 |
LRH1 | Rn00572649_m1 | 100 ± 15a | 57 ± 5b | 91 ± 7a | 92 ± 6a | p (surgery × sex) < 0.001 |
Receptors | ||||||
Erα | Rn00433142_m1 | 100 ± 6a | 75 ± 5b | 81 ± 4b | 76 ± 5b | p (surgery × sex) < 0.05 |
FGFR1 | Rn00577234_m1 | 100 ± 10 | 106 ± 6 | 88 ± 5 | 116 ± 8 | p (surgery) < 0.05 |
FXR | Rn00572658_m1 | 100 ± 7a | 59 ± 8b | 74 ± 6b | 64 ± 5b | p (surgery × sex) < 0.05 |
Gluconeogenesis | ||||||
G6PC | Rn01529640_g1 | 100 ± 4 | 80 ± 4 | 106 ± 6 | 93 ± 7 | P(surgery) < 0.01 |
PCK1 | Rn01529009_g1 | 100 ± 8 | 92 ± 12 | 158 ± 13 | 185 ± 16 | P(sex) < 0.001 |
Data are presented as mean ± SEM. Groups with different superscript letters are significantly different via Tukey post hoc analysis