Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-ktprf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-06T18:42:47.958Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Substrate metabolism, appetite and feeding behaviour under low and high energy turnover conditions in overweight women

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 June 2010

Francesca L. Burton
Affiliation:
Integrative and Systems Biology, Faculty of Biomedical and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK
Dalia Malkova
Affiliation:
Division of Developmental Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK
Muriel J. Caslake
Affiliation:
Section of Vascular Biochemistry, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK
Jason M. R. Gill*
Affiliation:
Integrative and Systems Biology, Faculty of Biomedical and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK
*
*Corresponding author: Dr Jason M. R. Gill, fax +44 141 3305481, email j.gill@bio.gla.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present study aimed to investigate whether substrate metabolism, appetite and feeding behaviour differed between high and low energy turnover conditions. Thirteen overweight premenopausal women completed two 1 d trials: low energy turnover (LET) and high energy turnover (HET), in a randomised, cross-over design. In LET, subjects consumed a test breakfast (49 % carbohydrate, 37 % fat, 14 % protein) calculated to maintain energy balance over a 6 h observation period, during which metabolic rate and substrate utilisation were measured and blood samples taken. Immediately following this an ad libitum buffet meal was provided. HET was identical to LET, except that subjects walked on a treadmill for 60 min at 50 % VO2max before the test breakfast, which was increased in size (by about 65 %) to replace the energy expended during the walk and maintain energy balance over the observation period. Postprandial fat balance (i.e. the difference between fat intake and oxidation) was lower and carbohydrate balance higher in HET compared with LET throughout the postprandial period (P < 0·05 for both). After the buffet meal, carbohydrate balance did not differ between trials but energy and fat balances were lower (by 0·28 MJ and 11·6 g, respectively) in HET compared with LET (P < 0·001 for both). Carbohydrate balance immediately before the buffet meal correlated negatively with buffet energy intake (r − 0·49) and postprandial acylated ghrelin responses (r − 0·48), and positively with postprandial glucose responses (r 0·49). These findings demonstrate that HET resulted in a more positive carbohydrate balance than LET, which associated with lower subsequent energy intake. This may have implications for the regulation of body weight.

Information

Type
Full Papers
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2010
Figure 0

Fig. 1 Study design. Subjects completed two separate trials: low energy turnover and high energy turnover. In the high energy turnover trial, the net energy expenditure of exercise was replaced () at the test meal (TM). Regular blood samples and appetite questionnaires ( ↓ ) and expired air measurements (*) were collected. The buffet meal (BM) was completed 6·5 h after the test meal.

Figure 1

Fig. 2 Cumulative energy balance (a), cumulative fat balance (b) and cumulative carbohydrate (CHO) balance (c) during the low energy turnover (○) and high energy turnover (●) trials. Times at which the test meal (□) and buffet meal (■) were provided are shown. Values are means, with standard errors represented by vertical bars. * Mean values were significantly different between trials (P < 0·001).

Figure 2

Fig. 3 Plasma log acylated ghrelin response during the low energy turnover (○) and high energy turnover (●) trials. The time at which the test meal (□) was provided is shown. Values are means, with standard errors represented by vertical bars.

Figure 3

Table 1 Plasma metabolic variables in the fasted state (n 13)(Mean values with their standard errors)

Figure 4

Table 2 Time-averaged postprandial area under the curve values for plasma metabolic variables (n 13)(Mean values with their standard errors)

Figure 5

Fig. 4 Postprandial plasma TAG (a), NEFA (b), glucose (c) and insulin (d) responses during the low energy turnover (○) and high energy turnover (●) trials. The time at which the test meal (□) was provided is shown. Values are means, with standard errors represented by vertical bars.

Figure 6

Table 3 Time-averaged postprandial area under the curve values for subjective ratings of appetite (n 13)(Mean values with their standard errors)

Figure 7

Fig. 5 Scattergrams indicating the relationship between cumulative carbohydrate (CHO) balance and energy intake (r − 0·49; P = 0·01) (a), cumulative CHO balance and postprandial glucose responses (r 0·49; P = 0·01) (b), cumulative CHO balance and log acylated ghrelin responses (r − 0·48; P = 0·02) (c) and postprandial glucose responses and log acylated ghrelin responses (r − 0·48; P = 0·02) (d) in the low energy turnover (○) and high energy turnover (●) trials.