Skip to main content

Table 4 Adipose tissue weight, relative weight (% of body weight, bw), cell number and cell mass in pregnant rats and their pups.

From: Treatment of pregnant rats with oleoyl-estrone slows down pup fat deposition after weaning

  

Pregnant/Lactating rats

 
  

P11

P21

L20

ANOVA

Mesenteric WAT

     

Weight g

C

4.30 ± 0.33

6.31 ± 0.40

0.73 ± 0.11

T, TR, TxTR

 

OE

 

3.43 ± 0.51 *

1.09 ± 0.17

 

Cell number n × 106

C

1076 ± 262

3382 ± 1415

408 ± 164

TxTR

 

OE

 

483 ± 104 *

681 ± 289

 

Cell mass ng

C

3.90 ± 0.86

2.28 ± 1.22

2.27 ± 1.23

TxTR

 

OE

 

7.55 ± 0.46 *

2.88 ± 1.43

 

Retroperitoneal WAT

     

Weight g

C

3.47 ± 0.42

4.69 ± 0.79

1.19 ± 0.05

T, TR, TxTR

 

OE

 

2.05 ± 0.20 *

1.36 ± 0.14

 

Cell number n × 106

C

228 ± 23.0

212 ± 34.5

87.4 ± 12.2

T, TR, TxTR

 

OE

 

99.4 ± 7.13 *

89.9 ± 3.09

 

Cell mass ng

C

14.5 ± 0.31

20.2 ± 0.81

14.1 ± 1.98

 
 

OE

 

21.2 ± 2.72

15.4 ± 1.32

 

Perigonadal WAT

     

Weight g

C

3.62 ± 0.42

7.44 ± 1.61

2.14 ± 0.61

T, TR, TxTR

 

OE

 

3.58 ± 0.71 *

2.19 ± 0.45

 

Cell number n × 106

C

324 ± 30.3

432 ± 23.9

207 ± 27.7

T, TR, TxTR

 

OE

 

243 ± 26.4 *

164 ± 28.8

 

Cell mass ng

C

11.2 ± 0.78

18.7 ± 3.83

9.91 ± 1.74

T

 

OE

 

14.1 ± 1.44

14.6 ± 3.65

 

Interscapular IBAT

     

Weight mg

C

330 ± 21.2

390 ± 91.2

340 ± 31.4

 
 

OE

 

391 ± 25.1

287 ± 26.6

 

Cell number n × 106

C

154 ± 13.9

92.9 ± 15.9

343 ± 4.21

T, TR, TxTR

 

OE

 

115 ± 10.3

191 ± 66.8 *

 

Cell mass ng

C

2.20 ± 0.16

4.21 ± 0.39

0.98 ± 0.09

T, TxTR

 

OE

 

3.49 ± 0.28

2.31 ± 0.77

 
   

Pups

 
   

PP20

PP30

ANOVA

Mesenteric WAT

     

Weight g

C

 

0.14 ± 0.03

0.45 ± 0.04

T, TR

 

OE

 

0.10 ± 0.02

0.31 ± 0.06 *

 

Cell number n × 106

C

 

189 ± 30.1

97.2 ± 6.51

TxTR

 

OE

 

44.2 ± 15.1 *

169 ± 25.3

 

Cell mass ng

C

 

0.72 ± 0.07

2.97 ± 0.55

TR, TxTR

 

OE

 

4.65 ± 0.37 *

1.72 ± 0.23 *

 

Retroperitoneal WAT

     

Weight g

C

 

0.05 ± 0.002

0.24 ± 0.03

T

 

OE

 

0.05 ± 0.001

0.16 ± 0.03 *

 

Cell number n × 106

C

 

16.4 ± 3.46

48.5 ± 10.3

T, TxTR

 

OE

 

7.22 ± 1.24

18.1 ± 4.32 *

 

Cell mass ng

C

 

3.41 ± 0.56

5.65 ± 0.71

T, TxTR

 

OE

 

7.74 ± 1.14 *

8.03 ± 1.73

 

Perigonadal WAT

     

Weight g

C

 

0.05 ± 0.007

0.19 ± 0.02

T

 

OE

 

0.03 ± 0.01

0.17 ± 0.04

 

Cell number n × 106

C

 

23.9 ± 4.80

41.7 ± 3.48

T, TR

 

OE

 

11.7 ± 1.27

47.9 ± 5.64

 

Cell mass ng

C

 

1.74 ± 0.29

4.41 ± 0.39

TR

 

OE

 

2.55 ± 0.25

3.18 ± 0.25 *

 

Interscapular IBAT

     

Weight mg

C

 

138 ± 20.1

184 ± 11.7

TxTR

 

OE

 

175 ± 17.4

147 ± 15.5

 

Cell number n × 106

C

 

74.1 ± 11.1

54.8 ± 7.47

 
 

OE

 

54.7 ± 6.65

45.5 ± 7.41

 

Cell mass ng

C

 

1.77 ± 0.13

4.19 ± 0.55

T, TxTR

 

OE

 

3.65 ± 0.31 *

2.62 ± 0.01

 
  1. Values are expressed as the mean ± s.e.m. of 6 animals. In pups the samples of perigonadal adipose tissue were a mixture of periovarian and epididymal tissue. Statistical analysis of the differences: Two-way ANOVA (time (T), treatment (TR) and interaction (TxTR)) was performed. Post-hoc Bonferroni test (comparison between C and OE): * = P < 0.01
Back to article page

Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology

ISSN: 1477-7827

Contact us