Cargando…

The impact of age and sex on body composition and glucose sensitivity in C57BL/6J mice

A paucity of data exists regarding sex differences in age‐related obesity and insulin resistance, particularly in the preclinical murine model. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of age and sex on insulin action and body composition in C57BL/6J mice. Aged (AG, 18 months old) male...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Reynolds, Thomas H., Dalton, Allison, Calzini, Lucas, Tuluca, Andrei, Hoyte, Dakembay, Ives, Stephen J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6356156/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30706674
http://dx.doi.org/10.14814/phy2.13995
_version_ 1783391463559659520
author Reynolds, Thomas H.
Dalton, Allison
Calzini, Lucas
Tuluca, Andrei
Hoyte, Dakembay
Ives, Stephen J.
author_facet Reynolds, Thomas H.
Dalton, Allison
Calzini, Lucas
Tuluca, Andrei
Hoyte, Dakembay
Ives, Stephen J.
author_sort Reynolds, Thomas H.
collection PubMed
description A paucity of data exists regarding sex differences in age‐related obesity and insulin resistance, particularly in the preclinical murine model. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of age and sex on insulin action and body composition in C57BL/6J mice. Aged (AG, 18 months old) male C57BL/6J mice, glucose tolerance was diminished compared to young (YG, 6 months old) male mice (Area Under Curve: 95,103 ± 6818 vs. 64,005 ± 2031, P = 0.002). However, there was no age‐related decline in glucose or insulin tolerance in females. Body composition analysis revealed that AG males had significantly greater body mass (42.2 ± 1.9 vs. 30.0 ± 0.4 g, P < 0.0001), fat mass (18.7 ± 2.0 vs. 3.3 ± 0.4 g, P < 0.0001), body fat (43.0 ± 3.0 vs. 11.0 ± 1.5%, P < 0.0001) than YG males. In AG females, body mass (32.8 ± 1.6 vs. 26.3 ± 0.9 g, P = 0.02) was higher, but fat mass (13.3 ± 2.0 vs. 9.5 ± 1.3 g, P = 0.24) and body fat (37.8 ± 4.8 vs. 35.5 ± 3.8%, P = 0.67) were similar when compared to YG females. AG males had significantly higher body mass (42.2 ± 1.9 vs. 32.8 ± 1.6 g, P = 0.001) and fat mass (18.7 ± 2.0 vs. 13.3 ± 2.0 g, P = 0.04) compared to AG females; however, body fat (43.0 ± 3.0 vs. 37.8 ± 4.8%, P = 0.28) was similar. Six weeks of treatment with MitoQ, a mitochondrial‐targeted antioxidant, did not reverse age‐related obesity in male mice. Surprisingly, obesity and insulin resistance appear to be reversed in the oldest of the old male mice (28 vs. 20 months). Our findings indicate that female mice, unlike males, are protected from age‐related obesity and insulin resistance.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6356156
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63561562019-02-08 The impact of age and sex on body composition and glucose sensitivity in C57BL/6J mice Reynolds, Thomas H. Dalton, Allison Calzini, Lucas Tuluca, Andrei Hoyte, Dakembay Ives, Stephen J. Physiol Rep Original Research A paucity of data exists regarding sex differences in age‐related obesity and insulin resistance, particularly in the preclinical murine model. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of age and sex on insulin action and body composition in C57BL/6J mice. Aged (AG, 18 months old) male C57BL/6J mice, glucose tolerance was diminished compared to young (YG, 6 months old) male mice (Area Under Curve: 95,103 ± 6818 vs. 64,005 ± 2031, P = 0.002). However, there was no age‐related decline in glucose or insulin tolerance in females. Body composition analysis revealed that AG males had significantly greater body mass (42.2 ± 1.9 vs. 30.0 ± 0.4 g, P < 0.0001), fat mass (18.7 ± 2.0 vs. 3.3 ± 0.4 g, P < 0.0001), body fat (43.0 ± 3.0 vs. 11.0 ± 1.5%, P < 0.0001) than YG males. In AG females, body mass (32.8 ± 1.6 vs. 26.3 ± 0.9 g, P = 0.02) was higher, but fat mass (13.3 ± 2.0 vs. 9.5 ± 1.3 g, P = 0.24) and body fat (37.8 ± 4.8 vs. 35.5 ± 3.8%, P = 0.67) were similar when compared to YG females. AG males had significantly higher body mass (42.2 ± 1.9 vs. 32.8 ± 1.6 g, P = 0.001) and fat mass (18.7 ± 2.0 vs. 13.3 ± 2.0 g, P = 0.04) compared to AG females; however, body fat (43.0 ± 3.0 vs. 37.8 ± 4.8%, P = 0.28) was similar. Six weeks of treatment with MitoQ, a mitochondrial‐targeted antioxidant, did not reverse age‐related obesity in male mice. Surprisingly, obesity and insulin resistance appear to be reversed in the oldest of the old male mice (28 vs. 20 months). Our findings indicate that female mice, unlike males, are protected from age‐related obesity and insulin resistance. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6356156/ /pubmed/30706674 http://dx.doi.org/10.14814/phy2.13995 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Physiological Reports published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of The Physiological Society and the American Physiological Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Reynolds, Thomas H.
Dalton, Allison
Calzini, Lucas
Tuluca, Andrei
Hoyte, Dakembay
Ives, Stephen J.
The impact of age and sex on body composition and glucose sensitivity in C57BL/6J mice
title The impact of age and sex on body composition and glucose sensitivity in C57BL/6J mice
title_full The impact of age and sex on body composition and glucose sensitivity in C57BL/6J mice
title_fullStr The impact of age and sex on body composition and glucose sensitivity in C57BL/6J mice
title_full_unstemmed The impact of age and sex on body composition and glucose sensitivity in C57BL/6J mice
title_short The impact of age and sex on body composition and glucose sensitivity in C57BL/6J mice
title_sort impact of age and sex on body composition and glucose sensitivity in c57bl/6j mice
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6356156/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30706674
http://dx.doi.org/10.14814/phy2.13995
work_keys_str_mv AT reynoldsthomash theimpactofageandsexonbodycompositionandglucosesensitivityinc57bl6jmice
AT daltonallison theimpactofageandsexonbodycompositionandglucosesensitivityinc57bl6jmice
AT calzinilucas theimpactofageandsexonbodycompositionandglucosesensitivityinc57bl6jmice
AT tulucaandrei theimpactofageandsexonbodycompositionandglucosesensitivityinc57bl6jmice
AT hoytedakembay theimpactofageandsexonbodycompositionandglucosesensitivityinc57bl6jmice
AT ivesstephenj theimpactofageandsexonbodycompositionandglucosesensitivityinc57bl6jmice
AT reynoldsthomash impactofageandsexonbodycompositionandglucosesensitivityinc57bl6jmice
AT daltonallison impactofageandsexonbodycompositionandglucosesensitivityinc57bl6jmice
AT calzinilucas impactofageandsexonbodycompositionandglucosesensitivityinc57bl6jmice
AT tulucaandrei impactofageandsexonbodycompositionandglucosesensitivityinc57bl6jmice
AT hoytedakembay impactofageandsexonbodycompositionandglucosesensitivityinc57bl6jmice
AT ivesstephenj impactofageandsexonbodycompositionandglucosesensitivityinc57bl6jmice