The absorption and transport of dietary cholesterol in the presence of peanut oil or randomized peanut oil
- 34 Downloads
Peanut oil has been shown to be unexpectedly atherogenic for cholesterol-fed rats, rabbits and rhesus monkeys. However, randomization (rearrangement of fatty acids to random distribution) of peanut oil significantly reduced its atherogenicity for rabbits and monkeys. This study was conducted to investigate whether the absorption and transport of dietary cholesterol was altered in the presence of peanut oil or randomized peanut oil, thereby accounting for the difference in the atherogenicity of the two diets. Intestinal lymph fistula rats were infused intraduodenally with a lipid emulsion at a rate of 3 ml/hr. The lipid emulsion contained either peanut oil (control) or randomized peanut oil (experimental) (10 mM),14C-cholesterol (1.3 mM) and sodium taurocholate (19 mM) in phosphate-buffered saline, pH 6.4. Lymph triglyceride, cholesterol and phospholipid outputs were similar in both groups of rats during fasting and subsequently during lipid infusion. Comparable recovery of14C-cholesterol from the intestinal lumen and the intestinal mucosa of the control and the experimental rats showed that the absorotion and transport of dietary cholesterol were similar in both groups of rats. Analyses of thefatty acid of both lymph and intestinal mucosal lipid again failed to reveal a difference between the 2 groups of rats. It is concluded that the difference in the atherogenicity between the peanut oil and the randomized peanut oil is probably caused by events subsequent to the release of cholesterol containing chylomicrons and very low density lipoproteins by the small intestinal epithelial cells.
KeywordsCholesterol Lipid Infusion Dietary Cholesterol Lipid Emulsion Sodium Taurocholate
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Gresham, G.A., and Howard, A.N. (1960) Br. J. Exp. Path. 41, 395–402.Google Scholar
- 8.Bollman, J.L., Cain, J.C., and Grindlay, J.H. (1949) J. Lab. Clin. Med. 89, 1349–1352.Google Scholar
- 9.Morgan, R.G.H. (1966) Q. J. Exp. Physiol. 51, 33–41.Google Scholar
- 11.Bennett-Clark, S. (1971) J. Lipid Res. 12, 43–55.Google Scholar
- 12.Folch, J., Lees, M., and Sloane-Stanley, G.H. (1957) J. Biol. Chem. 266, 497–509.Google Scholar
- 14.Parker, F., and Peterson, N.F. (1965) J. Lipid Res. 6, 455–460.Google Scholar
- 19.Turner, S.G., and Barrowman, J.A. (1977) Q. J. Exp. Physiol. 62, 175–180.Google Scholar