Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-ckgrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-15T17:25:47.410Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of reproduction on the interaction of dietary protein and calcium

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

N. R. H. El-Maraghi ,
B. S. Plantt  and
R. J. C. Stewart
N. R. H. El-Maraghi
Affiliation:
Human Nutrition Research Unit, Nutrition Building, National Institute for Medical Research, The Ridgeway, Mill Hill, London, NW 7
B. S. Plantt
Affiliation:
Human Nutrition Research Unit, Nutrition Building, National Institute for Medical Research, The Ridgeway, Mill Hill, London, NW 7
R. J. C. Stewart
Affiliation:
Human Nutrition Research Unit, Nutrition Building, National Institute for Medical Research, The Ridgeway, Mill Hill, London, NW 7
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. Rats were maintained from the age of 3 weeks until the end of a second reproductive cycle on diets having different protein values and Ca concentrations. 2. Reproductive performance was judged from the number of viable young, their size, body composition and rate of growth during suckling. 3. The size and quality of the bones of the mothers and offspring were assessed from radiographs, histological appearance, total weight of ash, ash/cm3 and ash:organic matter ratios of dry fat-free bone. 4. At the end of gestation the mean numbers and total weights of foetuses were low when the mothers had received diets of low protein value: there were smaller differences in the body-weight, water, ash and N contents of the individual foetuses. 5. When 0.44% Ca was included in the diet of low protein value, only one (three rats) of the six litters born survived beyond 1 week of age. 6. At weaning, the young born of and suckled by the protein-calorie deficient dams were only about half the weight of those from mothers receiving the high-protein diets; Ca deficiency produced relatively minor changes. 7. All the mothers lost weight during lactation irrespective of the protein value or Ca concentration of the diet; their bones had lower radiographic densities and less ash/cm3 than is usual in non-pregnant rats of similar age. 8. The interaction of protein and Ca and their relative importance in maintaining the skeletal structure of mother and offspring during pregnancy and lactation are discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 20 , Issue 4 , December 1966 , pp. 733 - 745
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1966

References

Ambegaokar, S. D. & Chandran, K. (1959). Indian J. med. Res. 47, 539.Google Scholar
Bruce, H. M. & Parkes, A. S. (1947). J. Hyg., Camb. 45, 70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, J. R. & Douglas, T. A. (1965). Br. J. Nutr. 19, 339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chick, H., Korenchevsky, V. & Roscoe, M. H. (1926). Biochem. J. 20, 622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chick, H. & Roscoe, M. H. (1926). Biochem. J. 20, 137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, W. M. Jr & Imboden, M. (1936). J. Nutr. 11, 147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawson, A. B. (1926). Stain Tech. 1, 123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
El-Maraghi, N. R. H. (1964). The inter-relationship of different levels of calcium and protein and their effect on the growth, composition and structure of bone. PhD Thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
El-Maraghi, N. R. H., Platt, B. S. & Stewart, R. J. C. (1965). Br. J. Nutr. 19, 491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FAO (1957 a). F.A.O. nutr. Stud. no. 15.Google Scholar
FAO (1957 b). F.A.O. nutr. Stud. no. 16.Google Scholar
Fiske, C. H. & Subbarow, Y. (1925). J. biol. Chem. 66, 375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankul, W. (1964). The inter-relationship between the protein value and zinc content of the diet. PhD Thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
Gran, F. C. (1960). Acta physiol. scand. 49, 192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greig, W. A. (1952). Br. J. Nutr. 6, 280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, J. H. & Foster, C. (1942). J. Nutr. 24, 245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Platt, B. S., Heard, C. R. C. & Stewart, R. J. C. (1964). In Mammalian Protein Metabolism. Vol. 2, p. 445. [Munro, H. N. and Allison, J. B., editors.] New York: Academic Press Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Platt, B. S. & Miller, D. S. (1959). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 18, vii.Google Scholar
Platt, B. S. & Stewart, R. J. C. (1962). Br. J. Nutr. 16, 483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, M. B. & Greig, W. A. (1952). Br. J. Nutr. 6, 265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, R. J. C. (1965). Wld Rev. Nutr. Diet. 5, 275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Venkatachalam, P. S. & Ramanathan, K. S. (1964). J. Nutr. 84, 38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar