Hostname: page-component-669899f699-chc8l Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-06T00:47:39.921Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth and liver enzyme response in growing rats to graded levels of methionine plus cystine in fortified-barley diets. Response at constant methionine :cystine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2008

T. N. Ngwira  and
R. M. Beames
T. N. Ngwira
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T I W5, Canada
R. M. Beames
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T I W5, Canada
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Twenty-eight male rats of initial age 27 d were fed on fortified-barley diets for 3 weeks. In all experimental diets, both crude protein (nitrogen × 6.25) and methionine:cystine were constant at 1200 g/kg dry matter (DM) and 2: 1 respectively. The basal diet contained 45 g methionine plus cystine/kg DM with L- methionine plus L-cystine (2: 1, w/w) added in increments of 0.5 g/kg DM to a final level of 70g methionine plus cystine/kg DM. A ‘positivecontrol’ diet of barley plus 193.7 g soya-bean meal/kg DM contained 6.0 g methionine plus cystine/kg DM.

2. Weight gain, food conversion efficiency (FCE), urinary urea-N excretion, carcass composition and activities of liver cystathionine synthase (EC 4.2.1.22) and N6-methyltetrahydrofolate-homocysteine-methyltransferase (EC 2.1.1.13) were determined.

3. Weight gain, food consumption, FCE and carcass composition measurements of rats showed either small or no differences between the experimental diets containing 4.5–7.0 g methionine plus cystine/kg DM. For the over-all period, weight gain and FCE of rats receiving the ‘positive control’ diet were significantly higher than values obtained with rats receiving any of the experimental diets.

4. Cystathionine synthase activity (μmol/mg protein per 60 min; units) increased from 13.38 at 4.5 g dietary methionine plus cystine/kg DM to 18.81 at 5.0 g dietary methionine plus cystine/kg DM. The activity was then inhibited to reach a minimum value of 10.16 units at the 6.0 g/kg DM dietary level. Thereafter the activity increased to a value of 3000 units at 7.0 g dietary methionine plus cystine/kg DM.

5. The activity of N5-methyltetrahydrofolate-homocysteine-methyltransferase was constant at 0.70 0.74 nmol/mg protein per 60 min between dietary levels of 4 5 and 5.0 g methionine plus cystine/kg DM. The activity then increased to a maximum value of 2.32 nmol/mgprotein per 60 min at the 6.0 g/kg DM level. Thereafter the activity decreased, reaching a minimum value of 0.70 nmol/mg protein per 60 min at the 7.0 g methionine plus cystine/kg level.

6. Urinary urea-N excretion decreased significantly from 1.07 g/kg DM intake at the 4.5 g dietary meth- ionine plus cystine/kg DM level to 1.05g/kg DM at the 5.0 g/kg dietary level, then dropped significantly to a level of 1.01–1.00/kg DM intake for the higher levels of dietary methionine plus cystine.

Type
Papers on General Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 43 , Issue 1 , January 1980 , pp. 217 - 228
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1980

References

REFERENCES

Abernathy, R. P. & Miller, J. (1965). J. Nutr. 86, 231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aw-Yong, L. M. & Beames, R. M. (1975). Can. J. Anim. Sci. 55, 765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byington, M. H., Howe, J. M. & Clark, H. E. (1972). J. Nutr. 102, 219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, S. & Passmore, R. (1967). In Human Nutrition and Dietetics, 3rd ed.Edinburgh: E. & S. Livingstone Ltd.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, J. D. (1967). Arch Biochem. Biophys. 122, 583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halm, J. & Le, C. D. (1975). U.B.C. MFAV Analysis of Variance/Covariance. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Computing Centre.Google Scholar
Harper, A. E., Benevenga, J. & Wohlhueter, R. M. (1970). Physiol. Rev. 50, 428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartsook, E. W. & Mitchell, H. H. (1956). J. Nutr. 60, 173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kashiwamata, S. & Greenberg, D. M. (1970). Biochem. biophys. Acta 212, 488.Google Scholar
Le Magnen, J. (1976). Annls Nutr. Aliment. 30, 315.Google Scholar
Mudd, S. H., Levy, H. L. & Morrow, G. (1970). Biochem. Med. 4, 193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Research Council (1969). United States—Canadian Tables of Feed Composition, Publ. I 684. Washington DC: National Research Council.Google Scholar
National Research Council (1972). Nutrient Requirements of Domestic Animals. No. 10, Nutrient Requirements of Laboratory Animals, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: National Research Council.Google Scholar
Ngwira, T. N. & Beames, R. M. (1978). Br. J. Nutr. 40, 443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shannon, B. M., Howe, J. M. & Clark, H. E. (1972). J. Nutr. 102, 557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sibbald, I. R., Bowland, J. P., Robblee, A. R. & Berg, R. T. (1957). J. Nutr. 61, 71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanschoubroek, F., De Wilde, R. & Lampo, P. (1967). Anim. Prod. 9, 67.Google Scholar
Womack, M. (1969). Proc. Soc. exp. Biol. Med. 131, 977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wretlind, K. A. J. & Rose, W. D. (1950). J. biol. Chem. 187, 697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar