Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Technical Report
  • Published:

Techniques and Methods

Strengths and validity of three methods for assessing rat body fat across the life course

International Journal of Obesity volume 44, pages 2430–2435 (2020)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

There are several different methods available for the determination of body fat composition. Two current methods requiring special instrumentation are magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). The use of these techniques is very limited despite desirable properties, due to their high costs. Dissection of all fat depots (DF) requires no special instrumentation and allows examination and evaluation of each fat depot in more detail. MRI, DXA, and DF each have their unique advantages and disadvantages when they are applied to animal models. Most studies have determined body fat in young animals, and few studies have been performed in aging models. The aim of this study was to compare MRI, DXA, and DF data in offspring (F1) of mothers fed with control and high-fat diet. We studied rats that varied by age, sex, and maternal diet. The relationships between the three methods were determined via linear regression methods (using log-transformed values to accommodate relativity in the relationships), incorporating when useful age, sex, or diet of the animal. We conclude that the three methods are comparable for measuring body fat, but that direct equivalence gets masked by age, sex, and sometimes dietary group. Depending on the equipment available, the budget of the laboratory, and the nature of the research questions, different approaches may often suggest themselves as the best one.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Comparison of MRI, DXA and DF in all animals.
Fig. 2: Comparison of MRI, DXA and DF: in PND 140 (young adult):

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lau EY, Liu J, Archer E, McDonald SM, Liu J. Maternal weight gain in pregnancy and risk of obesity among offspring: a systematic review. J Obes. 2014;2014:524939. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/524939.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Reilly JJ, Methven E, McDowell ZC, Hacking B, Alexander D, Stewart L, et al. Health consequences of obesity. Arch Dis Child. 2003;88:748–52.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Vega CC, Reyes-Castro LA, Bautista CJ, Larrea F, Nathanielsz PW, Zambrano E. Exercise in obese female rats has beneficial effects on maternal and male and female offspring metabolism. Int J Obes. 2015;39:712.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Sen S, Simmons RA. Maternal antioxidant supplementation prevents adiposity in the Offspring of Western Diet–Fed Rats. Diabetes. 2010;59:3058–65.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Alfaradhi MZ, Kusinski LC, Fernandez-Twinn DS, Pantaleão LC, Carr SK, Ferland-McCollough D, et al. Maternal obesity in pregnancy developmentally programs adipose tissue inflammation in young, lean male mice offspring. Endocrinology. 2016;157:4246–56.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Platt K, Charnigo R, Pearson K. Adult offspring of high-fat diet-fed dams can have normal glucose tolerance and body composition. J Dev Orig Health Dis. 2014;5:229–39.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Björntorp P. Metabolic implications of body fat distribution. Diabetes Care. 1991;14:1132–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Duren DL, Sherwood RJ, Czerwinski SA, Lee M, Choh AC, Siervogel RM, et al. Body composition methods: comparisons and interpretation. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2008;2:1139–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Johnson M, Smith D Jr, Nagy T. Validation of quantitative magnetic resonance (QMR) for determination of body composition in rats. Int J Body Compos Res. 2009;7:99.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Vega CC, Reyes‐Castro LA, Rodríguez‐González GL, Bautista CJ, Vázquez‐Martínez M, Larrea F, et al. Resveratrol partially prevents oxidative stress and metabolic dysfunction in pregnant rats fed a low protein diet and their offspring. J Physiol. 2016;594:1483–99.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Lecoutre S, Deracinois B, Laborie C, Eberle D, Guinez C, Panchenko PE, et al. Depot-and sex-specific effects of maternal obesity in offspring’s adipose tissue. J Endocrinol. 2016;230:39–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Lukaski HC, Hall CB, Marchello MJ, Siders WA. Validation of dual x-ray absorptiometry for body-composition assessment of rats exposed to dietary stressors. Nutrition. 2001;17:607–13.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Blake GM, Fogelman I. An update on dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. Semin Nucl Med. 2010;40:62–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Tinsley FC, Taicher GZ, Heiman ML. Evaluation of a quantitative magnetic resonance method for mouse whole body composition analysis. Obes Res. 2004;12:150–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Nixon JP, Zhang M, Wang C, Kuskowski MA, Novak CM, Levine JA, et al. Evaluation of a quantitative magnetic resonance imaging system for whole body composition analysis in rodents. Obesity. 2010;18:1652–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Makan S, Bayley HS, Webber CE. Precision and accuracy of total body bone mass and body composition measurements in the rat using X-ray-based dual photon absorptiometry. Can J Physiol Pharmacol. 1997;75:1257–61.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Bertin E, Ruiz J-C, Mourot J, Peiniau P, Portha B. Evaluation of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry for body-composition assessment in rats. J Nutr. 1998;128:1550–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Lipman R, Smith D, Blumberg J, Bronson R. Effects of caloric restriction or augmentation in adult rats: longevity and lesion biomarkers of aging. Aging Clin Exp Res. 1998;10:463–70.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Rodríguez‐González GL, Reyes-Castro LA, Bautista CJ, et al. Maternal obesity accelerates rat offspring metabolic ageing in a sex-dependent manner. J Physiol. 2019;597:5549–63. https://doi.org/10.1113/JP278232.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Zambrano E, Bautista C, Deas M, Martinez‐Samayoa P, Gonzalez‐Zamorano M, Ledesma H, et al. A low maternal protein diet during pregnancy and lactation has sex‐and window of exposure‐specific effects on offspring growth and food intake, glucose metabolism and serum leptin in the rat. J Physiol. 2006;571:221–30.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Kwekel JC, Desai VG, Moland CL, Branham WS, Fuscoe JC. Age and sex dependent changes in liver gene expression during the life cycle of the rat. BMC Genom. 2010;11:675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Miller CN, Kauffman TG, Cooney PT, Ramseur KR, Brown LM. Comparison of DEXA and QMR for assessing fat and lean body mass in adult rats. Physiol Behav. 2011;103:117–21.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Nagy TR, Clair AL. Precision and accuracy of dual‐energy X‐ray absorptiometry for determining in vivo body composition of mice. Obes Res. 2000;8:392–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Jones A, Johnson M, Nagy T. Validation of quantitative magnetic resonance for the determination of body composition of mice. Int J Body Compos Res. 2009;7:67.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Kuo AH, Li C, Mattern V. et al. Sex-dimorphic acceleration of pericardial, subcutaneous, and plasma lipid increase in offspring of poorly nourished baboons. Int J Obes (Lond). 2018;42:1092–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41366-018-0008-2.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the different grants: CONACyT-SEP (Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología-Secretaría de Educación Pública) México (287912) and Newton Fund RCUK-CONACyT (Research Councils UK—CONACyT—I000/726/2016 FONCICYT/49/2016) and ANR-CONACyT 2015-16-273510.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departamento de Biología de la Reproducción, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico

    Diana C. Castro-Rodríguez, Carlos A. Ibáñez, Jorge Uribe & Elena Zambrano

  2. CONACyT-Cátedras, Departamento de Biología de la Reproducción, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico

    Diana C. Castro-Rodríguez

  3. Departamento de Biología, Facultad de Química, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Ciudad de México, Mexico

    Marta Menjivar & María de los Ángeles Granados-Silvestre

  4. Unidad Académica de Yucatán, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mérida, Yucatán, Mexico

    Marta Menjivar

  5. Department of Statistics, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY, USA

    Kenneth G. Gerow

  6. Wyoming Center for Pregnancy and Life Course Health Research, Department of Animal Science, University Wyoming, Laramie, WY, USA

    Peter W. Nathanielsz

Authors
  1. Diana C. Castro-Rodríguez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Carlos A. Ibáñez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jorge Uribe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marta Menjivar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. María de los Ángeles Granados-Silvestre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Kenneth G. Gerow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Peter W. Nathanielsz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Elena Zambrano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elena Zambrano.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Castro-Rodríguez, D.C., Ibáñez, C.A., Uribe, J. et al. Strengths and validity of three methods for assessing rat body fat across the life course. Int J Obes 44, 2430–2435 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41366-020-0619-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41366-020-0619-2

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links