JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Effect of metabolic imprinting on growth and development in piglets
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Effect of metabolic imprinting on growth and development in piglets
Ryu, Jae-Hyoung; Lee, Yoo-Kyung; Cho, Sung-Back; Hwang, Ok-Hwa; Park, Sung-Kwon;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
It has long been known that nutritional and environmental influences during the early developmental period affect the biological mechanisms which determine animal metabolism. This phenomenon, termed `metabolic imprinting`, can cause subtle but long-lasting responses to prenatal and postnatal nutrition and even be passed onto the next generation. A large amount of research data shows that nutrient availability, in terms of quantity as well as quality, during the early developing stages can decrease the number of newborn piglets and their body weight and increase their susceptibility to death before weaning. However, investigation of potential mechanisms of `the metabolic imprinting` effect have been scant. Therefore, it remains unknown which factors are responsible for embryonic and early postnatal nutrition and which factors are major determinants of body weight and number of new born piglets. Intrauterine undernutrition, for example, was studied using a rat model providing dams 50% restricted nutrients during pregnancy and the results showed significant decreases in birth weight of newborns. This response may be a characteristic of a subset of modulations in embryonic development which is caused by the metabolic imprinting. Underlying mechanisms of intrauterine undernutrition and growth retardation can be explained in part by epigenetics. Epigenetics modulate animal phenotypes without changes in DNA sequences. Epigenetic modifications include DNA methylation, chromatin modification and small non-coding RNA-associated gene silencing. Precise mechanisms must be identified at the morphologic, cellular, and molecular levels by using interdisciplinary nutrigenomics approaches to increase pig production. Experimental approaches for explaining these potential mechanisms will be discussed in this review.
 Keywords
development;growth;metabolic imprinting;nutrition;pigs;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
 References
1.
Allen RE, Rankin LL. 1990. Regulation of satellite cells during skeletal muscle growth and development. Proceedings of Society Experimental Biology and Medicine 194:81-86. crossref(new window)

2.
Allen WR, Wilsher S, Turnbull C, Stewart F, Ousey J, Rossdale PD, Fowden AL. 2002. Influence of maternal size on placental, fetal and postnatal growth in the horse: I. Development in utero. Reviews of Reproduction 123:445-453. crossref(new window)

3.
Barker DJ, Clark PM. 1997. Fetal undernutrition and disease in later life. Reviews of Reproduction 2:105-112. crossref(new window)

4.
Cho YM, Choi BH, Kim TH, Lee W, Lee JE, Oh SJ, Cheong IC. 2004. A study on estimation of individual growth curve parameters and their relationships with meat quality traits of crossbred between Korean native boars and Landrace sows. Journal of Animal Science and Technology. 46(4):503-508. crossref(new window)

5.
Davies MJ, Norman RJ. 2002. Programming and reproductive functioning. Trends in Endocrinology and Metabolism 13:386-392. crossref(new window)

6.
Flummer C, Kristensen NB, Theil PK. 2012. Body composition of piglets from sows fed the leucine metabolite $\beta$-hydroxy $\beta$-methyl butyrate in late gestation. Journal of Animal Science 4:442-444.

7.
Hales CN, Barker DJ. 2001. The thrifty phenotype hypothesis: Type 2 diabetes. British Medical Bulletin 60:5-20. crossref(new window)

8.
Hannon GJ. 2002. RNA interference. Nature 418:249

9.
Hegsted DM, Moscoso I, Collazos CHC. 1952. A study of the minimum calcium requirements of adult men: three figures. Journal of Nutrition 46:181-201.

10.
Hostetler CE, Kincaid RL, Mirando MA. 2003. The role of essential trace elements in embryonic and fetal development in livestock. Veterinary Journal 166:125-139. crossref(new window)

11.
Jane Q. 2006. Epigenetics: Unfinished symphony. Nature 441:143-145 crossref(new window)

12.
Levin BE. 2006. Metabolic imprinting: critical impact of the perinatal environment on the regulation of energy homeostasis. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences 361:1107-1121. crossref(new window)

13.
Inserra L, Luciano G, Bella M, Scerra M, Cilione C, Basile P, Lanza M, Priolo A. 2015. Effect of including carob pulp in the diet of fattening pigs on the fatty acid composition and oxidative stability of pork. Meat Science 100:256-261. crossref(new window)

14.
Mateo RD, Wu G, Bazer FW, Park JC, Shinzato I, Kim SW. 2007. Dietary L-arginine supplementation enhances the reproductive performance of gilts. Journal of Nutrition 137:652-656.

15.
Milligan BN, Fraser D, Kramer DL. 2002. Within-litter birth weight variation in the domestic pig and its relation to pre-weaning survival, weight gain, and variation in weaning weights. Livestock Production Science 76:181-191. crossref(new window)

16.
Sarker, MSK, Yim KJ, Ko SY, Uuganbayar D, Kim GM, Bae IH, Oh JI, Yee ST, Yang CJ. 2010. Green Tea Level on Growth Performance and Meat Quality in Finishing Pigs. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition 9(1):10-14. crossref(new window)

17.
Nissen PM, Oksbjerg N. 2011. Birth weight and postnatal dietary protein level affect performance, muscle metabolism and meat quality in pigs. Animal 5(9):1382-1389. crossref(new window)

18.
Oksbjerg N, Nissen PM, Therkildsen M, Moller HS, Larsen LB, Andersen M, Young JF. 2013. Meat science and muscle biology symposium: In utero nutrition related to fetal development, postnatal performance, and meat quality of pork. Journal of Animal Science 91(3):1443-1453. crossref(new window)

19.
Park SK. 2015. Comparison of muscle stem cells from normal and runt pigs. Journal of Agriculture and Life Science 49(2):75-82.

20.
Pere MC. 1995. Maternal and fetal blood levels of glucose, lactate, fructose and insulin in the conscious pig. Journal of Animal Science 73:2994-2999. crossref(new window)

21.
Phillips T. 2008. Small non-coding RNA and gene expression. Nature 1:115.

22.
Rajender S, Avery K, Agarwal A. 2011. Epigenetics, spermatogenesis and male infertility. Mutation Research 727(3):62-71 crossref(new window)

23.
Rehfeldt C, Kuhn G. 2006. Consequences of birth weight for postnatal growth performance and carcass quality in pigs as related to myogenesis. Journal of Animal Science 84:E113-E123. crossref(new window)

24.
Rehfeldt C, Lefaucheur L, Block J, Stabenow B, Pfuhl R, Otten W, Kalbe C. 2012. Limited and excess protein intake of pregnant gilts differently affects body composition and cellularity of skeletal muscle and subcutaneous adipose tissue of newborn and weanling piglets. European Journal of Nutrition 51(2):151-165. crossref(new window)

25.
Wu G, Bazer FW, Wallace JM, Spencer TE. 2006. Board-Invited Review: Intrauterine growth retardation: Implications for the animal sciences. Journal of Animal Science 84:2316-2337. crossref(new window)

26.
Yen TT, Gill AM, Frigeri LG, Barsh GS, Wolff GL. 1994. Obesity, diabetes, and neoplasia in yellow A(vy)/- mice: ectopic expression of the agouti gene. FASEB Journal 8:479-488.