Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T01:21:31.813Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Maternal adipose tissue response to nicotine administration in the pregnant rat: effects on fetal body fat and cellularity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

Christine M. Williams  and
Tazeen Kanagasabai
Christine M. Williams
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, North East Surrey College of Technology, Reigate Road, Ewell, Surrey KT17 3DS
Tazeen Kanagasabai
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, North East Surrey College of Technology, Reigate Road, Ewell, Surrey KT17 3DS
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. Nicotine has been implicated as a causative factor in the intrauterine growth retardation associated with smoking in pregnancy. A study was set up to ascertain the effect of nicotine on fetal growth and whether this could be related to the actions of this drug on maternal adipose tissue metabolism.

2. Sprague-Dawley rats were mated and assigned to control and nicotine groups, the latter receiving nicotine in the drinking-water throughout pregnancy. Animals were weighed at regular intervals and killed on day 20 of pregnancy. Rates of maternal adipose tissue lipolysis and lipogenesis were measured. Fetal and placental weights were recorded and analysis of fetal body water, fat, protein and DNA carried out.

3. Weight gains of mothers in the nicotine group were less in the 1st and 2nd weeks of pregnancy, but similar to controls in the 3rd week. Fetal body-weights, DNA, protein and percentage water contents were similar in both groups. Mean fetal body fat (g/kg) was significantly higher in the nicotine group (96.2 (se 5.1)) compared with controls (72.0 (se 2.9)). Rates of maternal lipolysis were also higher in the nicotine group.

4. The cause of these differences and their effects on maternal and fetal well-being is discussed.

Type
Papers of direct relevance to Clinical and Human Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 51 , Issue 1 , January 1984 , pp. 7 - 13
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1984

References

Beaton, G. H., Beare, J., Ryu, M. H. & McHenry, E. W. (1954). Journal of Nutrition 54,291–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, R. F. & King, J. E. (1966). American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 95, 515–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, R. F., Little, C. R. D. & King, J. E. (1968). American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 100, 957–968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bizzi, A., Tacconi, T., Medea, A. & Garattini, S. (1972). Pharmacology 7, 216–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booth, C., Elphick, M. C., Hendrickse, W. & Hull, D. (1981). Journal of Developmental Physiology, 3(3), 177–189.Google Scholar
Bruce, N. (1979). Biology of Reproduction 20, 229–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Churchill, J. A. & Berendes, H. W. (1969). In Perinatal Factors Affecting Human Development PAHO Sci. Publ. no. 185. Washington DC: Pan American Health Organization.Google Scholar
Churchill, J. A., Berendes, H. W. & Nemore, J. (1969). American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 105,257–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coltart, T. M. & Williams, C. (1976). British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 83, 241–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curtis-Prior, P. B., Handley, T. & Temple, N. J. (1975). Analyst, London 100, 106–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahlquist, G., Persson, U. & Persson, B. (1972). Biology of the Neonate 20, 40–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edson, J. L., Hudson, D. G. & Hull, D. (1975). Biology of the Neonate 27, 50–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elliot, J. A. (1975). European Journal of Clinical Investigation 5, 159–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elphick, M. C., Edson, J. L. & Hull, D. (1978). Biology of the Neonate 34, 146–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fain, J. N. & Scow, R. O. (1966). American Journal of Physiology 210, 19–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felig, P. & Lynch, V. (1970). Science 170, 990–992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frazier, T. M., Davis, G. H., Goldstein, H. & Goldberg, I. D. (1961). American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 81, 988–996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galton, D. J. & Wilson, J. D. D. (1970). Clinical Science 38, 661–675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gornall, A. G., Bardawill, C. J. & David, M. M. (1949). Journal of Biological Chemistry 177, 551–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammer, R. E. & Mitchell, H. E. (1979). Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine 162, 333–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haworth, J. C. & Ford, J. D. (1972). American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 112, 653–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herrera, E., Knopp, R. H. & Freinkel, N. (1969). Journal of Clinical Investigation 48, 2260–2272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hershbaum, A., Bellet, S., Dickstein, E. R. & Feinberg, L. J. (1961). Circulation Research 9, 631–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hershbaum, A., Khorsandian, R., Caplan, R. F., Bellet, S. & Feinberg, L. J. (1963). Circulation 28, 52–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hudson, C. B. & Timiras, P. S. (1972). Biology of Reproduction 7, 247–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isaac, P. F. & Rand, M. J. (1972). Nature 236, 308–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, C. T. (1976). Biochemical Journal 156, 357–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knopp, R. H., Herrera, E. & Freinkel, N. (1970). Journal of Clinical Investigation 49, 1438–1446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knopp, R. H., Saudek, C. H., Arky, R. A. & O'Sullivan, J. B. (1973). Endocrinology 92, 984–988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koren, Z. & Shafrir, E. (1964). Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine 116, 411–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krous, H. F., Campbell, G. A., Fowler, M. W. & Catron, A. C. (1981). American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 140, 743–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landesman-Dwyer, S. & Emanuel, I. (1979). Teratology 19, 119–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCrae, A. R. (1974). Studies of metabolism consequent upon acute ingestion of carbohydrates in primates. PhD Thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
Meyer, M. B. & Tonascia, J. A. (1977). American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 128, 494–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naeye, R. L. (1978). American Journal of Pathology 90, 289–293.Google Scholar
Pipe, N. G., Smith, T., Halliday, D., Edmonds, C. J., Williams, C. & Coltart, T. M. (1979). British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 86, 929–935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savel, L. E. & Roth, E. (1962). Obstetrics and Gynecology 20, 313–317.Google Scholar
Simpson, W. J. (1957). American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 73, 808–810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. W. (1973). Journal of Dairy Research 40, 353–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. & Cochran, W. G. (1980). Statistical Methods, 7th ed. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Szabo, A. J. & Grimaldi, R. D. (1970). Advances in Metabolic Disorders 4, 185–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szabo, A. J., Grimaldi, R. D. & Jung, W. E. (1969). Metabolism, Clinical and Experimental 18, 406–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thiennes, C. H. & Behrend, A. (1933). Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapy 48, 317–321.Google Scholar
Turner, D. M. (1975). Xenobiotica 5, 553–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Underwood, P. B., Hester, L. L., Laffitte, T. & Gregg, K. V. (1965). American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 91, 270–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoshinaga, K., Rice, C., Krenn, J. & Price, R. L. (1979). Biology of Reproduction 20, 294–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Younoszai, M. K., Peloso, J. & Haworth, J. C. (1969). American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 104, 1207–1213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar