Evaluation of Beneficial Metabolic Effects of Berries in High-Fat Fed C57BL/6J Mice
Table 3
Effect of berry supplementation on cecum weight, total fecal excretion, and lipid excretion1.
Cecum weight (g)
Dry feces (g/c/24 h)
Fecal triacylglycerol (g/c/24h)
Fecal cholesterol (g/c/24 h)
Mean ()
SEM
Mean ()
SD
Mean ()
SD
Mean ()
SD
Lingonberry
0.64***
0.028
2.44
0.15
6.22***
1.22
3.74
0.93
Blackcurrant
0.35**
0.022
2.12
0.45
10.68***
3.45
2.80
0.39
Bilberry
0.78***
0.035
2.86
0.25
15.18***
1.61
5.88***
1.21
Raspberry
0.29
0.013
2.85
0.40
7.89***
1.36
3.74
0.34
Açai
0.50***
0.031
3.18
0.55
5.57**
1.64
5.75***
1.03
Crowberry
0.42***
0.030
3.41
0.21
9.50***
1.83
7.52***
0.93
Prune
0.38***
0.023
2.25
0.12
0.96
0.26
3.91
0.53
Blackberry
0.35**
0.019
3.15
0.34
4.73**
1.16
2.33*
0.41
Control
0.21
0.012
2.85
0.24
1.40
0.55
3.60
0.21
Low-fat control
0.32*
0.036
2.68
0.30
0.77
0.14
2.26*
0.15
Statistical comparisons of cecum weight were made using ANOVA and Dunnett’s posttest, all groups compared to control, , , . Remaining statistical comparisons to control were made using repeated-measures two-way ANOVA and Sidak’s posttest. SEM: standard error of the mean; SD: standard deviation. The number refers to the number of observations (two cages (c) per group analyzed over 24 hours, two days in a row). Six mice were housed in each cage.
