Advanced Glycation End Products Induce Obesity and Hepatosteatosis in CD-1 Wild-Type Mice
Table 2
Effect of the diets on weight gain, epididymal fat pad, and liver weights.
HAGE-HF
LAGE-HF
HAGE-LF
LAGE-LF
value
Group 1
Group 2
Group 3
Group 4
= 20
= 11
= 6
= 11
Four weeks
Weight gain (g)
10.4 ± 0.7
12 ± 0.8
12.3 ± 0.6
4.9 ± 0.5
<0.0001
Weight % gain
40 ± 4
54.4 ± 4
53 ± 3
15.3 ± 3
<0.0001
Fat pad weight (g)
1.1 ± 0.04
0.6 ± 0.06
0.7 ± 0.02
0.5 ± 0.03
<0.0001
Fat pad weight %
2.8 ± 0.4
1.7 ± 0.6
1.8 ± 0.1
1.3 ± 0.3
<0.0001
Liver weight (g)
2.1 ± 0.06
1.8 ± 0.1
2 ± 0.04
2.2 ± 0.04
NS
Liver weight %
5.5 ± 0.1
5.4 ± 0.2
5.6 ± 0.1
5.8 ± 0.1
NS
Group 5
Group 6
Group 7
Group 8
= 7
= 10
= 6
= 8
Six weeks
Weight gain (g)
20.4 ± 1.0
15.4 ± 0.7
14.8 ± 0.5
14.6 ± 1.0
<0.0001
Weight % gain
88.3 ± 4.4
69.3 ± 3
64 ± 2.7
61.4 ± 3.7
<0.0001
Fat pad weight (g)
1.6 ± 0.05
0.9 ± 0.05
0.8 ± 0.03
0.5 ± 0.04
<0.0001
Fat pad weight %
3.7 ± 0.3
2.3 ± 0.4
2.1 ± 0.2
1.3 ± 0.3
<0.0001
Liver weight (g)
2.1 ± 0.06
2 ± 0.01
2 ± 0.04
2 ± 0.02
NS
Liver weight %
5.2 ± 0.2
5.3 ± 0.1
5.4 ± 0.1
5.2 ± 0.1
NS
Values are presented with mean ± SEM. We used nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis tests followed by Dunn’s multiple comparisons test. Results were considered statistically significant at . Weight % gain is expressed as weight gain in relation to initial weight of animal (final weight-initial weight/initial weight). Fat pad weight % and liver weight % are expressed as weight of fat pad or liver in relation to final weight of animal (fat pad or liver weight/final weight).
