Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-dvtzq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T21:39:33.480Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effects of monobutyrin and tributyrin on liver lipid profile, caecal microbiota composition and SCFA in high-fat diet-fed rats

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 October 2017

Thao Duy Nguyen*
Affiliation:
Food for Health Science Centre, Lund University, PO Box 124, SE-221 00, Lund, Sweden
Olena Prykhodko
Affiliation:
Food for Health Science Centre, Lund University, PO Box 124, SE-221 00, Lund, Sweden
Frida Fåk Hållenius
Affiliation:
Food for Health Science Centre, Lund University, PO Box 124, SE-221 00, Lund, Sweden
Margareta Nyman
Affiliation:
Food for Health Science Centre, Lund University, PO Box 124, SE-221 00, Lund, Sweden
*
* Corresponding author: T. D. Nguyen, fax +46 46 222 4532, email thao.nguyen@food-health-science.lu.se

Abstract

Butyric acid has been shown to have suppressive effects on inflammation and diseases related to the intestinal tract. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether supplementation of two glycerol esters, monobutyrin (MB) and tributyrin (TB), would reach the hindgut of rats, thus having an effect on the caecal profile of SCFA, microbiota composition and some risk markers associated with chronic inflammation. For this purpose, rats were fed high-fat diets after adding MB (1 and 5 g/kg) and TB (5 g/kg) to a diet without any supplementation (high-fat control; HFC). A low-fat (LF) diet was also included. In the liver, total cholesterol concentrations, LDL-cholesterol concentrations, LDL:HDL ratio, and succinic acid concentrations were reduced in rats given the MB and TB (5 g/kg) diets, compared with the group fed the HFC diet. These effects were more pronounced in MB than TB groups as also expressed by down-regulation of the gene Cyp8b1. The composition of the caecal microbiota in rats fed MB and TB was separated from the group fed the HFC diet, and also the LF diet, as evidenced by the absence of the phylum TM7 and reduced abundance of the genera Dorea (similar to LF-fed rats) and rc4-4. Notably, the caecal abundance of Mucispirillum was markedly increased in the MB group compared with the HFC group. The results suggest that dietary supplementation of MB and TB can be used to counteract disturbances associated with a HFC diet, by altering the gut microbiota, and decreasing liver lipids and succinic acid concentrations.

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2017
Figure 0

Table 1. Composition (g/kg dry weight) of the test diets

Figure 1

Table 2. Final body weight, body weight gain, total feed intake, feed efficiency ratio (body weight gain/feed intake), wet and freeze-dried liver weight, spleen weight, caecal tissue, caecal content and caecal pH in rats fed a low-fat (LF) diet, a high-fat control (HFC) diet or the HFC diet supplemented with monobutyrin at 1 g/kg diet (0·1 MB), MB at 5 g/kg diet (MB) or tributyrin at 5 g/kg diet (TB) for 21 d(Mean values with their standard errors; n 7)

Figure 2

Table 3. SCFA in the caecum, portal serum, and liver of rats fed a low-fat (LF) diet, a high-fat control (HFC) diet or the HFC diet supplemented with monobutyrin at 1 g/kg diet (0·1 MB), MB at 5 g/kg diet (MB) or tributyrin at 5 g/kg diet (TB) for 21 d(Mean values with their standard errors; n 7)

Figure 3

Fig. 1. Liver succinic acid and lipid concentrations of rats fed a low-fat (LF) diet, a high-fat control (HFC) diet or the HFC diet supplemented with monobutyrin at 1 g/kg diet (0·1 MB), MB at 5 g/kg diet (MB) or tributyrin at 5 g/kg diet (TB) for 21 d (n 7/group). (a) Relative succinic acid (total amount of succinic acid in the liver/final body weight, μmol/g); (b) succinic acid concentration (μmol/g); (c) total cholesterol (mg/g); (d) LDL-cholesterol (mg/g); (e) HDL-cholesterol (mg/g); (f) LDL-cholesterol:HDL-cholesterol ratio; (g) TAG (mg/g). Values are means, with standard errors represented by vertical bars. Mean value was significantly different from that of the HFC group: * P < 0·05, ** P < 0·01, *** P < 0·001, **** P < 0·0001 (one-way ANOVA and Dunnett's test).

Figure 4

Fig. 2. Pearson's correlation of propionic acid in the caecum and portal serum of rats fed a low-fat diet, a high-fat control (HFC) diet or the HFC diet supplemented with monobutyrin at 1 g/kg diet, monobutyrin at 5 g/kg diet or tributyrin at 5 g/kg diet for 21 d (r 0·664; P < 0·001).

Figure 5

Fig. 3. Serum lipid and lipopolysaccharide-binding protein (LBP) concentrations of rats fed a low-fat (LF) diet, a high-fat control (HFC) diet or the HFC diet supplemented with monobutyrin at 1 g/kg diet (0·1 MB), MB at 5 g/kg diet (MB) or tributyrin at 5 g/kg diet (TB) for 21 d (n 7/group). (a) Total cholesterol (mmol/l); (b) TAG (mmol/l); (c) LBP (ng/ml). Values are means, with standard errors represented by vertical bars.

Figure 6

Table 4. Relative mRNA expression of Nr0b2, Cyp7a1 and Cyp8b1 in the liver of rats fed a low-fat (LF) diet, a high-fat control (HFC) diet or the HFC diet supplemented with monobutyrin at 1 g/kg diet (0·1 MB), MB at 5 g/kg diet (MB) or tributyrin at 5 g/kg diet (TB) for 21 d(Mean values with their standard errors; n 7, except n 6 for HFC)

Figure 7

Fig. 4. Relative abundance of caecal microbial taxa in rats fed a low-fat (LF) diet, a high-fat control (HFC) diet or the HFC diet supplemented with monobutyrin at 1 g/kg diet (0·1 MB), MB at 5 g/kg diet (MB) or tributyrin at 5 g/kg diet (TB) for 21 d (n 5–7/group). (a) TM7 phylum; (b) unclassified genus, family F16; (c) Bacteroides genus; (d) unclassified genus, family S24-7; (e) Mucispirillum genus; (f) Dorea genus; (g) rc4-4 genus. Values are means, with standard errors represented by vertical bars. Mean value was significantly different from that of the HFC group: * P < 0·05, ** P < 0·01 (one-way ANOVA and Dunnett's test or Kruskall–Wallis test).

Figure 8

Fig. 5. (a) Score scatter plot representing how each group is separated and related to other groups: LF, low-fat diet; HFC, high-fat control diet; 0·1 MB, HFC diet supplemented with monobutyrin at 1 g/kg diet; MB, HFC diet supplemented with monobutyrin at 5 g/kg diet; TB, HFC diet supplemented with tributyrin at 5 g/kg diet. PLS-DA, partial least-squares-projection-to-latent-structures-discriminant analysis. Each circle stands for one rat. (b) Loading scatter plot displays the caecal microbiota composition at the genus level and some liver lipid biomarkers in rats fed the LF diet, the HFC diet or the HFC diet supplemented with 0·1 MB, MB or TB for 21 d (n 5–7/group). Variables are marked as four-point stars and groups are showed as circles. CHOL, cholesterol; SUC, succinic acid; X, microbiota genera; Y, liver biomarkers.

Supplementary material: File

Nguyen et al supplementary material

Nguyen et al supplementary material 1

Download Nguyen et al supplementary material(File)
File 57.3 KB