Skip to main content
. 2018 Oct 23;59(12):2308–2320. doi: 10.1194/jlr.M085209

TABLE 3.

FA distribution profile of TAG, DAG, FFA, or CE in BAT from Th+/+ and Th+/− mice

Percent of +/− Content vs. Th+/+ (4°C), % Statistical Significance
TAG
 14:00 181.71 ns
 16:0 173.28 ***
 16:1n-9 140.46 ns
 16:1n-7 159.13 ns
 18:0 188.45 ns
 18:1n-9 175.79 ***
 18:1n-7 154.75 ns
 18:2n-6 151.93 ***
 18:3n-3 136.76 ns
 20:0 135.04 ns
 20:1n-9 156.04 ns
 20:1n-7 153.91 ns
 20:3n-6 509.70 ns
 20:4n-6 165.72 ns
 22:0 71.27 ns
 22:1n-9 618.31 ns
CE
 16:0 115.01 ns
 16:1n-9 78.46 ns
 18:0 103.95 ns
 18:1n-9 100.63 ns
DAG
 14:0 105.54 ns
 16:0 149.88 ***
 16:1n-9 45.13 ns
 16:1n-7 143.62 ns
 18:0 142.08 **
 18:1n-9 141.47 ***
 18:2n-6 112.74 ns
 20:0 110.29 ns
FFA
 14:0 121.51 ns
 16:0 129.40 ***
 16:1n-9 142.10 ns
 16:1n-7 148.56 ns
 18:0 121.47 ns
 18:1 166.77 ns
 18:2 98.75 ns
 20:0 73.58 ns
 20:1n-9 99.28 ns
 20:4n-6 58.98 ns
 22:0 63.89 ns

Percentage of FAs in BAT of Th+/− versus Th+/+ mice after 6 h exposure to cold at 4°C. Data are mean ± SEM. n = 10 or 11 per group. Two-way ANOVA was used. ns, not significant. *P < 0.05; * P < 0.01; ** P < 0.001.