Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35284452›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2022

Sex and Species Differences in the Development of Diet-Induced Obesity and Metabolic Disturbances in Rodents.

Ivana Maric, Jean-Philippe Krieger, Pauline van der Velden, Stina Börchers, Mohammed Asker, Milica Vujicic, Ingrid Wernstedt Asterholm, Karolina P Skibicka

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 110 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
110citing papers in PubMed
16.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

110 citing papers in PubMed, 152 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. On the importance of including both sexes in animal studies - insights from home-cage monitoring.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

50 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ivana MaricInstitute for Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Jean-Philippe KriegerInstitute for Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Pauline van der VeldenInstitute for Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Stina BörchersInstitute for Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Mohammed AskerInstitute for Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Milica VujicicInstitute for Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Ingrid Wernstedt AsterholmInstitute for Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Karolina P SkibickaInstitute for Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
University of Gothenburg · SEPennsylvania State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prevalence and health consequences of obesity differ between men and women. Yet, most preclinical studies investigating the etiology of obesity have, to date, been conducted in male rodents. Notably, diet is a major determinant of obesity, but sex differences in rodent models of diet-induced obesity, and the mechanisms that underlie such differences, are still understudied. Here, we aim to determine whether time course and characteristics of diet-induced obesity differ between sexes in rats and mice, and to investigate the potential causes of the observed divergence. To achieve this, we offered the most commonly tested rodents of both sexes, SD rats and C57BL/6 mice, a free choice of 60 % high-fat diet (HFD) and regular chow; body weight, food intake, fat mass, brown adipose responses, locomotor activity and glucose tolerance were assessed in a similar manner in both species. Our results indicate that overall diet-induced hyperphagia is greater in males but that females display a higher preference for the HFD, irrespective of species. Female rats, compared to males, showed a delay in diet-induced weight gain and less metabolic complications. Although male rats increased brown adipose tissue thermogenesis in response to the HFD challenge, this was not sufficient to counteract increased adiposity. In contrast to rats, female and male mice presented with a dramatic adiposity and impaired glucose tolerance, and a decreased energy expenditure. Female mice showed a 5-fold increase in visceral fat, compared to 2-fold increase seen in male mice. Overall, we found that male and female rodents responded very differently to HFD challenge, and engaged different compensatory energy expenditure mechanisms. In addition, these sex differences are divergent in rats and mice. We conclude that SD rats have a better face validity for the lower prevalence of overweight in women, while C57BL/6 mice may better model the increased prevalence of morbid obesity in women.

Indexed as

brown adipose tissue (BAT)diet-induced obesity (DIO)miceratssex differencesspecies differences

Identifiers

PMID35284452
PMCPMC8908889
OpenAlexW4213450004

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.