Chengelis Christopher P, Kirkpatrick Jeannie B, Marit Gary B, Morita Osamu, Tamaki Yasushi, Suzuki Hiroyuki
WIL Research Laboratories, LLC, Ashland, OH 44805-9281, USA.
Food Chem Toxicol. 2006 Jan;44(1):81-97. doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2005.06.005. Epub 2005 Aug 9.
The potential chronic toxic effects of DAG (diacylglycerol) when administered orally for 12 months were evaluated in this dietary study in Beagle dogs. DAG is a cooking oil which contains >80% diglycerides, <20% triglycerides and 5% monoglycerides. For this study, a special diet was prepared with no dietary fat so that all of the dietary fat could be provided by DAG, at various concentrations together with a control oil. The control oil, TG (triacylglycerol), was prepared to contain >85% triglycerides, <10% diglycerides and 5% monoglycerides. The fatty acid composition for DAG and TG was closely matched. Dietary concentrations of 0% DAG/9.5% TG (TG control), 1.5% DAG/8.0% TG, 5.5% DAG/4.0% TG, and 9.5% DAG/0% TG were presented daily, seven days per week, for 52 weeks. A second concurrent control group received the standard basal diet (Certified Canine LabDiet 5007, which has a fat content of 9.5%). The basal diet, control article-treated and DAG-treated groups each consisted of four male and four female dogs. Treatment was initiated in prejuvenile (2.5-month-old) dogs. Statistical evaluations compared the DAG-treated groups both to the basal diet and 9.5% TG control groups. The clinical condition of the animals, body weights, body weight gains and food consumption were unaffected by DAG. Hematology and urinalysis parameters were unaffected. No serum chemistry changes indicative of a toxic effect were observed. There were no effects noted on ECG data. No test article-related gross or histopathologic findings or changes in organ weights were observed. While there were no identifiable differences between the effects of TG and DAG, both caused some differences relative to the basal diet (lower food consumption, higher alkaline phosphatase, cholesterol and triglycerides). These differences were not toxicologically significant and were attributed to the differences in the diet rather than the fat source. Thus, DAG at dietary concentrations up to 9.5% for one year had no effect on normal canine growth and development, in comparison to TG.
在这项针对比格犬的饮食研究中,评估了口服给予二酰甘油(DAG)12个月的潜在慢性毒性作用。DAG是一种食用油,其中二酰甘油含量>80%,甘油三酯含量<20%,单酰甘油含量为5%。在本研究中,制备了一种不含膳食脂肪的特殊饮食,以便所有膳食脂肪都由不同浓度的DAG与对照油提供。对照油三酰甘油(TG)的制备使其甘油三酯含量>85%,二酰甘油含量<10%,单酰甘油含量为5%。DAG和TG的脂肪酸组成紧密匹配。每周7天,每天提供0%DAG/9.5%TG(TG对照)、1.5%DAG/8.0%TG、5.5%DAG/4.0%TG和9.5%DAG/0%TG的膳食浓度,持续52周。第二个同期对照组接受标准基础饮食(认证犬类实验室饮食5007,脂肪含量为9.5%)。基础饮食组、对照品处理组和DAG处理组每组均由4只雄性犬和4只雌性犬组成。在幼年前期(2.5个月大)的犬中开始进行处理。统计评估将DAG处理组与基础饮食组和9.5%TG对照组进行了比较。DAG对动物的临床状况、体重、体重增加和食物消耗均无影响。血液学和尿液分析参数也未受影响。未观察到表明有毒性作用的血清化学变化。心电图数据未发现影响。未观察到与受试品相关的大体或组织病理学发现,也未观察到器官重量的变化。虽然TG和DAG的作用之间没有可识别的差异,但两者相对于基础饮食均引起了一些差异(食物消耗较低、碱性磷酸酶、胆固醇和甘油三酯较高)。这些差异在毒理学上不显著,且归因于饮食差异而非脂肪来源。因此,与TG相比,膳食浓度高达9.5%的DAG对正常犬的生长发育在一年时间内没有影响。