Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-sd5qd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-09T02:40:54.449Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Whey protein concentrate enhances intestinal integrity and influences transforming growth factor-β1 and mitogen-activated protein kinase signalling pathways in piglets after lipopolysaccharide challenge

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 January 2016

Kan Xiao
Affiliation:
The Key Laboratory of Molecular Animal Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Science College, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
Lefei Jiao
Affiliation:
The Key Laboratory of Molecular Animal Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Science College, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
Shuting Cao
Affiliation:
The Key Laboratory of Molecular Animal Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Science College, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
Zehe Song
Affiliation:
The Key Laboratory of Molecular Animal Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Science College, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
Caihong Hu*
Affiliation:
The Key Laboratory of Molecular Animal Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Science College, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
Xinyan Han*
Affiliation:
The Key Laboratory of Molecular Animal Nutrition, Ministry of Education, Animal Science College, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
*
* Corresponding authors: Dr C. Hu, email chhu@zju.edu.cn; Dr X. Han, email xyhan@zju.edu.cn
* Corresponding authors: Dr C. Hu, email chhu@zju.edu.cn; Dr X. Han, email xyhan@zju.edu.cn
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Whey protein concentrate (WPC) has been reported to have protective effects on the intestinal barrier. However, the molecular mechanisms involved are not fully elucidated. Transforming growth factor-β1 (TGF-β1) is an important component in the WPC, but whether TGF-β1 plays a role in these processes is not clear. The aim of this study was to investigate the protective effects of WPC on the intestinal epithelial barrier as well as whether TGF-β1 is involved in these protection processes in a piglet model after lipopolysaccharide (LPS) challenge. In total, eighteen weanling pigs were randomly allocated to one of the following three treatment groups: (1) non-challenged control and control diet; (2) LPS-challenged control and control diet; (3) LPS+5 %WPC diet. After 19 d of feeding with control or 5 %WPC diets, pigs were injected with LPS or saline. At 4 h after injection, pigs were killed to harvest jejunal samples. The results showed that WPC improved (P<0·05) intestinal morphology, as indicated by greater villus height and villus height:crypt depth ratio, and intestinal barrier function, which was reflected by increased transepithelial electrical resistance and decreased mucosal-to-serosal paracellular flux of dextran (4 kDa), compared with the LPS group. Moreover, WPC prevented the LPS-induced decrease (P<0·05) in claudin-1, occludin and zonula occludens-1 expressions in the jejunal mucosae. WPC also attenuated intestinal inflammation, indicated by decreased (P<0·05) mRNA expressions of TNF-α, IL-6, IL-8 and IL-1β. Supplementation with WPC also increased (P<0·05) TGF-β1 protein, phosphorylated-Smad2 expression and Smad4 and Smad7 mRNA expressions and decreased (P<0·05) the ratios of the phosphorylated to total c-jun N-terminal kinase (JNK) and p38 (phospho-JNK:JNK and p-p38:p38), whereas it increased (P<0·05) the ratio of extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) (phospho-ERK:ERK). Collectively, these results suggest that dietary inclusion of WPC attenuates the LPS-induced intestinal injury by improving mucosal barrier function, alleviating intestinal inflammation and influencing TGF-β1 canonical Smad and mitogen-activated protein kinase signalling pathways.

Information

Type
Full Papers
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2016 
Figure 0

Table 1 Ingredients and chemical composition of the weaned diets on an as-fed basis

Figure 1

Table 2 GenBank accession numbers, sequences of forward and reverse primers and fragment sizes used for real-time PCR

Figure 2

Table 3 Effects of dietary whey protein concentrate (WPC) on the jejunum morphology and barrier function of piglets* (Mean values with their standard errors; n 6 pigs)

Figure 3

Fig. 1 Effects of dietary whey protein concentrate (WPC) on protein expressions of occludin, claudin-1 and zonula occludens-1 (ZO-1) in jejunal mucosa of piglets. (A) Representative blots of occludin, claudin, ZO-1 and β-actin in the jejunal mucosa of piglets. (B) Relative tight-junction protein expressions in the jejunal mucosa of piglets. Values are means (n 6), and standard deviations represented by vertical bars. a,bMean values with unlike letters were significantly different (P<0·05). The control sample was used as the reference sample. The protein expression of all samples was expressed as fold changes, calculated relative to the control group. , Control; , lipopolysaccharide (LPS); , LPS+WPC. Control (non-challenged control), piglets receiving a control diet and injected with 0·9 % sterile saline; LPS (LPS-challenged control), piglets receiving the same control diet and injected with Escherichia coli LPS; LPS+WPC (LPS challenged+5 %WPC), piglets receiving a 5 %WPC diet and injected with LPS.

Figure 4

Table 4 Effects of dietary whey protein concentrate (WPC) on cytokine mRNA levels on the jejunal mucosa of piglets* (Mean values with their standard errors; n 6 pigs)

Figure 5

Fig. 2 Effects of dietary whey protein concentrate (WPC) on protein expression of transforming growth factor-β1 (TGF-β1) in the jejunal mucosa of piglets. (A) Representative blots of TGF-β1 expression and β-actin. (B) Relative TGF-β1 protein expression in the jejunal mucosa of piglets. a,bMean values with unlike letters were significantly different (P<0·05). Values are means (n 6), and standard deviations represented by vertical bars. The control sample was used as the reference sample. The protein expression of all samples was expressed as fold changes, calculated relative to the control group. Control (non-challenged control), piglets receiving a control diet and injected with 0·9 % sterile saline; lipopolysaccharide (LPS) (LPS-challenged control), piglets receiving the same control diet and injected with Escherichia coli LPS; LPS+WPC (LPS challenged+5 %WPC), piglets receiving a 5 %WPC diet and injected with LPS.

Figure 6

Fig. 3 Effects of dietary whey protein concentrate (WPC) on Smad2 activation in the jejunal mucosa of piglets. (A) Representative blots from one of the six pigs. (B) Values calculated as the ratio of the phosphorylation level (p-Smad2):total level of Smad2. The control sample was used as the reference sample. The protein expression of all samples was expressed as fold changes, calculated relative to the control group. Values are means (n 6), with standard deviations represented by vertical bars. a,bMean values with unlike letters were significantly different (P<0.05). Control (non-challenged control), piglets receiving a control diet and injected with 0·9% sterile saline; LPS (lipopolysaccharide-challenged control), piglets receiving the same control diet and injected with Escherichia coli LPS; LPS+WPC (LPS challenged +5% WPC), piglets receiving a 5% WPC diet and injected with LPS.

Figure 7

Table 5 Effects of dietary whey protein concentrate (WPC) on mRNA expressions of smad signals in the jejunal mucosa of piglets* (Mean values with their standard errors; n 6 pigs)

Figure 8

Fig. 4 Effects of whey protein concentrate (WPC) on mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPK) signal pathways in the jejunal mucosa of piglets. The three MAPK are the c-Jun NH2-terminal kinase (JNK), p38 MAPK and extracellular regulated kinases (ERK 1/2). (A) Representative blots from one of the six pigs. (B) Values calculated as the ratios of their phosphorylation levels (phospho-JNK:phospho-p38:phospho-ERK (p-JNK:p-p38:p-ERK)) to the total levels of MAPK. The values in samples from the control were used as the reference sample. The protein expression of all samples was expressed as fold changes, calculated relative to the values from the control group. Values are means (n 6), with standard deviations represented by vertical bars. a,bMean values with unlike letters were significantly different (P<0·05). , Control; , lipopolysaccharide (LPS); , LPS+WPC. Control (non-challenged control), piglets receiving a control diet and injected with 0·9% sterile saline; LPS (LPS-challenged control), piglets receiving the same control diet and injected with Escherichia coli LPS; LPS+WPC (LPS challenged + 5 % WPC), piglets receiving a 5% WPC diet and injected with LPS. JNK, c-jun N-terminal kinase; p-JNK, phospho-JNK; ERK, extracellular regulated kinases; p-ERK, phospho-ERK.