Table 4.
Effect of Met and GAA supplementation on measurements derived from Met flux
| 0 Met | 6 g/d Met | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GAA, g/d | P-value 1 | |||||||||||
| Flux, mmol Met/hr | 0 | 7.5 | 15 | 0 | 7.5 | 15 | SEM | Met | G-L | G-Q | Met × G-L | Met × G-Q |
| n | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | ||||||
| 1-13C-l-Met | 8.02 | 10.08 | 9.94 | 13.71 | 11.95 | 11.10 | 1.18 | <0.01 | 0.73 | 0.71 | 0.04 | 0.38 |
| Methyl-2H3-l-Met | 10.68 | 12.74 | 13.18 | 13.67 | 12.90 | 12.59 | 0.86 | 0.17 | 0.34 | 0.65 | 0.03 | 0.42 |
| Metabolizable Met2 | 1.31 | 1.31 | 1.30 | 2.97 | 2.97 | 2.99 | 0.01 | <0.001 | 0.75 | 0.69 | 0.21 | 0.53 |
| Met deposition3 | 0.95 | 0.86 | 0.92 | 1.14 | 1.13 | 1.31 | 0.09 | <0.01 | 0.34 | 0.21 | 0.19 | 0.88 |
| Protein synthesis4 | 7.63 | 9.65 | 9.55 | 11.89 | 10.12 | 9.42 | 1.19 | 0.10 | 0.78 | 0.76 | 0.04 | 0.36 |
| Protein degradation5 | 6.70 | 8.77 | 8.64 | 10.74 | 8.98 | 8.12 | 1.18 | 0.18 | 0.73 | 0.71 | 0.04 | 0.38 |
| Hcys production6 | 2.95 | 3.12 | 3.59 | 1.85 | 2.87 | 2.63 | 0.99 | 0.49 | 0.28 | 0.90 | 0.69 | 0.75 |
| Transsulfuration7 | 0.36 | 0.45 | 0.38 | 1.84 | 1.85 | 1.68 | 0.09 | <0.01 | 0.35 | 0.19 | 0.23 | 0.88 |
| Remethylation8 | 2.60 | 2.64 | 3.16 | 0.11 | 0.96 | 1.44 | 0.97 | 0.02 | 0.31 | 0.97 | 0.67 | 0.79 |
1G-L, linear effect of GAA; G-Q, quadratic effect of GAA.
2Metabolizable Met = ((DM intake, kg/hr × 6.71 mmol metabolizable Met/kg DM intake [Campbell et al., 1997]) + supplemental Met.
3Met deposition = N retention, g/hr × 6.25 g protein/g N × 0.134 mmol Met/g protein (Ainslie et al., 1993).
4Protein synthesis = PD + Met deposition.
5Protein degradation = 1-13C-l-Met flux − metabolizable Met.
6Homocysteine production (use of Met in methylation reactions) = Methyl-2H3-l-Met flux – PS.
7Transsulfuration = 1-13C-l-Met flux – PS.
8Remethylation = Methyl-2H3-l-Met flux – 1-13C-l-Met flux.