Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-g7rbq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-30T02:05:42.439Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of the diet on the turnover of bile acids in germ-free and conventional rats

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

B. E. Gustafsson  and
A. Norman
B. E. Gustafsson
Affiliation:
Department of Germfree Research, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
A. Norman
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Chemistry, Danderyds Sjukhus, Danderyd, Sweden
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. [24-14C]cholic acid was given to conventional and germ-free rats and the faecal isotope excretion studied for 8 days. The turnover, pool size and daily excretion of cholic acid and its metabolites were calculated for rats on three different diets, i.e. a commercial type diet (pellets), a semi-synthetic diet without (D7) and with 20% cellulose (D7+cellulose). The transit time of the intestinal contents was evaluated by following the excretion of an orally administered dose of carmine.

2. The amount of bile acids excreted was two to three times higher in both conventional and germ-free rats receiving pellets than in those receiving diet D7. This difference in bile acid excretion between animals receiving different diets cannot, therefore, be caused by an influence of the diet on the gastro-intestinal microflora. This effect of the commercial diet could not be due to a high fibre content, since an increase in the fibre content of the semi-synthetic diet D7 by the addition of 20% cellulose did not reproduce the effect obtained with the commercial diet.

3. The difference observed in bile acid excretion between germ-free and conventional rats on diet D7 was mainly ascribed to the much longer transit time of intestinal contents in germ-free as compared with conventional rats.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , August 1969 , pp. 429 - 442
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1969

References

Bollman, J. L., Cain, J. C. & Grindlay, J. H. (1948). J. Lab. clin. Med. 33, 1349.Google Scholar
Danielsson, H. (1963). In Advances in Lipid Research. Vol. 1, p. 334. [Paoletti, R. and Kritchevsky, D., editors.] New York, Academic Press Inc.Google Scholar
Eneroth, P., Hellström, K. & Sjövall, J. (1968). Acta chem. scand. 22, 1729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gustafsson, B. E. (1948). Acta pathol. microbiol. scand. Suppl.73.Google Scholar
Gustafsson, B. E. (1959). Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 78, 17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gustafsson, B. E., Bergström, S., Lindstedt, S. & Norman, A. (1957). Proc. Soc. exp. Biol. Med. 94, 467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gustafsson, B. E. & Norman, A. (1962). Proc. Soc.exp. Biol. Med. 110, 387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gustafsson, B. E. & Norman, A. (1968). Scand. J. Gastroenterol. 3, 625.Google Scholar
Gustafsson, B. E. & Norman, A. (1969). Br. J. Nutr. 23, 627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gustafsson, B. E., Norman, A. & Sjövall, J. (1960). Archs Biochem. Biophys. 91, 93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubbell, R. B., Mendel, L. B. & Wakeman, H. J. (1937). J. Nutr. 14, 273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iwata, T. & Yamasaki, K. (1964). J. Biocha., Tokyo 56, 424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Portman, O.W. & Murphy, P. (1958). Archs Biochem. Biophys. 76, 367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Severina, L. O., Torgov, I. V., Skrjabin, G. K., Wulfson, N. S., Zaretskii, V. I. & Papernaja, I. B. (1968). Tetrahedron 24, 2145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sjövall, J. & Akesson, I. (1955). Acta physiol. scand. 34, 1.Google Scholar