and HFat feeding tended to cause slightly more weight gain starting at week 1 and significantly increased adiposity, which occurred as early as 3 days. The caloric intake was greater in both HFru and HFat group in the first week which was gradually stabilized to be,1012% in both groups over 8 weeks of feeding. The basal metabolic rate was enhanced in mice fed a HFru or HFat diet compared to CH-fed mice. Basal plasma glucose was slightly elevated after 8 weeks of HFru or HFat feeding while plasma levels of insulin and triglyceride were unchanged. As expected, the hepatic triglyceride content was readily augmented in response to HFru or HFat feeding indicating the development of steatosis. Interestingly, HFru feeding resulted in a more pronounced triglyceride accumulation than that of HFat feeding during the 8 weeks of the study. As elevated liver triglyceride content was found to remain similarly elevated from week 1 onwards, our subsequent studies focused on the one week model to investigate the mechanism involved in the development of hepatic steatosis and insulin resistance. Both HFru and HFat feeding resulted in glucose intolerance and impairment in hepatic insulin signal transduction HFru and HFat-fed mice displayed impaired glucose tolerance, as reflected by a 58% and 64% greater incremental area under the PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22179927 Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress and Lipid Pathways HFat feeding also resulted in a 50% induction of SREBP-1c mRNA expression. These results further demonstrated the effects of HFru and HFat feeding on different lipid metabolic pathways. CH Body mass Week 1 Week 8 Caloric intake Week 1 Week 8 VO2 Week 1 Blood glucose Week 1 Week 8 Plasma insulin Week 1 Week 8 Plasma triglyceride Week 1 Week 8 0.9960.02 1.1560.13 ND 0.2260.02 6.260.2 6.660.2 3368627 43067 443611 24.160.4 27.860.6 HFru HFat 24.960.5 28.760.6 24.560.5 28.060.8 HFru and HFat feeding did not alter mitochondrial metabolism in the liver Given the important role of the mitochondria in substrate utilisation, we next sought to examine Cobimetinib cost whether mitochondrial functions were altered by HFru feeding. Measurement of mitochondrial oxidation capacity from the liver homogenates using palmitate and glutamate as substrates revealed no difference compared to the CH group. Consistent with this, we also found no defects in the expression level of key proteins in the respiratory chain. Neither the key regulators of mitochondrial biogenesis, fatty acid oxidation, nor the marker for mitochondrial numbers in cells were altered by HFru or HFat feeding. However, the activity of citrate synthase, an enzyme that catalyses the first step in the citric acid cycle, was significantly enhanced by both HFru and HFat feeding. HFat feeding resulted in 
an increase activity of b-HAD, while the effect of HFru feeding was not statistically significant. These results indicate that mitochondrial function was upregulated in both HFat and HFru feeding, suggesting increased rather than decreased oxidation of fatty acids. 539616 497624 572623 49864 3733635 3968638 6.260.3 7.860.4 6.660.3 8.260.2 ND 0.2560.03 ND 0.1960.02 1.1160.06 0.7860.06 1.1160.06 1.0360.07 ND, not determined. Data are means 6 SE of 1015 mice per group. p,0.05, p,0.01 vs CH-fed mice. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0030816.t001 Neither HFru nor HFat feeding was associated with oxidative stress in the liver As reactive oxygen species are important by-products of an increased b-oxidation of long chain fatty acids which could cause oxidative stress to the
