↓ Skip to main content

Low-fat diet, and medium-fat diets containing coconut oil and soybean oil exert different metabolic effects in untrained and treadmill-trained mice

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, April 2022
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Low-fat diet, and medium-fat diets containing coconut oil and soybean oil exert different metabolic effects in untrained and treadmill-trained mice
Published in
Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, April 2022
DOI 10.1186/s12970-018-0234-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark Christian Manio, Shigenobu Matsumura, Kazuo Inoue

Abstract

Diets containing fats of different proportions and types have been demonstrated to influence metabolism. These fats differ in long chain fatty acids (LCFAs) or medium chain fatty acids (MCFAs) content. In our laboratory using swimming as the training modality, MCFAs increased endurance attributed to increased activities of oxidative enzymes. How it affects whole-body metabolism remains unexplored. The present study investigated the metabolic, biochemical and genetic adaptations with treadmill running as the training modality. C57BL/6N mice were divided into untrained and trained groups and provided with low-fat (10% kcal from soybean oil), coconut oil (10% kcal from soybean oil, 20% kcal from coconut oil) or soybean oil (30% kcal from soybean oil) diet. Training was performed on a treadmill for 30 days. After recovery, whole-body metabolism at rest and during exercise, endurance, substrate metabolism, mitochondrial enzyme activities, and gene expression of training-adaptive genes in the muscle and liver were measured. At rest, medium-fat diets decreased respiratory exchange ratio (RER) (p < 0.05). Training increased RER in all diet groups without affecting oxygen consumption (p < 0.05). During exercise, diets had no overt effects on metabolism while training decreased oxygen consumption indicating decreased energy expenditure (p < 0.05). Coconut oil without training improved endurance based on work (p < 0.05). Training improved all endurance parameters without overt effects of diet (p < 0.05). Moreover, training increased the activities of mitochondrial enzymes likely related to the increased expression of estrogen related receptor (ERR) α and ERRβ (p < 0.05). Coconut oil inhibited peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) β/δ activation and glycogen accumulation in the muscle but activated PPARα in the liver in the trained state (p < 0.05). Substrate utilization data suggested that coconut oil and/or resulting ketone bodies spared glycogen utilization in the trained muscle during exercise thereby preserving endurance. Our data demonstrated the various roles of diet and fat types in training adaptation. Diets exerted different roles in PPAR activation and substrate handling in the context of endurance exercise training. However, the role of fat types in training adaptations is limited as training overwhelms and normalizes the effects of diet in the untrained state particularly on endurance performance, mitochondrial biogenesis, and ERR expression.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 19%
Student > Master 11 15%
Other 5 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 26 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 17%
Sports and Recreations 6 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Other 13 18%
Unknown 27 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 March 2022.
All research outputs
#7,687,335
of 23,390,392 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition
#676
of 892 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,373
of 443,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition
#643
of 851 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,390,392 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 892 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 59.5. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 443,066 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 851 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.