Search

This study investigates the effects of the essential oil from Amomum villosum (EOA) on liver-protective effects in Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus), utilizing a multidisciplinary approach that integrates physiological assessments and transcriptomic and metabolomic analyses. Fish were fed diets containing 2 g/kg of EOA over a 56-day trial, with a no-EOA diet serving as the control. The results demonstrate that EOA supplementation improves liver histology, enhances antioxidant capacities, and reduces inflammation in tilapia. The transcriptomic analysis revealed significant alterations in gene expression profiles related to RNA splicing, metabolism, and disease pathways. The identification of differential genes and disease databases identified key target genes associated with the primary component of EOA for its anti-hepatobiliary disease effects. Furthermore, a molecular docking analysis of EOA major components with core differentially expressed genes in the hepatobiliary syndrome indicated that α-pinene is a potential Hsp90 inhibitor, which may prevent inflammation. A metabolomic analysis further demonstrated that EOA supplementation leads to notable changes in liver phospholipids, fatty acids, and carbohydrate metabolism. These findings underscore the potential of EOA as a natural additive for improving liver health in tilapia, offering valuable insights to the aquaculture industry for enhancing fish health and welfare in intensive farming systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have been shown to improve glycemic control and insulin sensitivity and reduce body weight in obese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D). This trial sought to evaluate the therapeutic effect of oral and subcutaneous semaglutide in NAFLD and its sequelae in obesity and/or T2D. Methods: In an open-labelled intervention study, the sample was 180 patients classified into three parallel groups (1:1:1): group I received oral semaglutide, group II patients received injectable semaglutide, and group III received pioglitazone and/or vitamin E. Patients were evaluated at 6 and 12 months. Results: There was a substantial improvement in lipid profile, liver enzymes, and body mass index, especially in group II. As for HDL, only group II showed a consistent increase at both 6 months (51 ± 4.62 mg/dL) and 12 months (50.08 ± 2.45 mg/dL) compared with baseline (45.6 ± 6.37 mg/dL) (p-value < 0.001). Despite the non-significant difference in NAFLD fibrosis score (NFS) (p-value = 0.45 and 0.63), group II had significantly lower scores of the fibrosis-4 score (FIB-4), liver stiffness measurement (LSM), and controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) at 6 and 12 months (p-value < 0.001). Conclusions: Semaglutide improves lipid profile, liver steatosis, and fibrosis parameters and reduces the BMI in T2D and obese patients with NAFLD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigates the effects of the essential oil from Amomum villosum (EOA) on liver-protective effects in Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus), utilizing a multidisciplinary approach that integrates physiological assessments and transcriptomic and metabolomic analyses. Fish were fed diets containing 2 g/kg of EOA over a 56-day trial, with a no-EOA diet serving as the control. The results demonstrate that EOA supplementation improves liver histology, enhances antioxidant capacities, and reduces inflammation in tilapia. The transcriptomic analysis revealed significant alterations in gene expression profiles related to RNA splicing, metabolism, and disease pathways. The identification of differential genes and disease databases identified key target genes associated with the primary component of EOA for its anti-hepatobiliary disease effects. Furthermore, a molecular docking analysis of EOA major components with core differentially expressed genes in the hepatobiliary syndrome indicated that α-pinene is a potential Hsp90 inhibitor, which may prevent inflammation. A metabolomic analysis further demonstrated that EOA supplementation leads to notable changes in liver phospholipids, fatty acids, and carbohydrate metabolism. These findings underscore the potential of EOA as a natural additive for improving liver health in tilapia, offering valuable insights to the aquaculture industry for enhancing fish health and welfare in intensive farming systems.

Abstract Traditional Hawaiian fishponds, called loko iʻa, are a low‐impact and culturally important aquaculture system that historically produced significant fish yields. To better understand the structure of the contemporary food web of the restored Heʻeia fishpond, a mark‐recapture experiment was conducted to estimate the population abundance of the three dominant predatory fishes, and gut content, genetic barcoding, and stable isotope analyses were used to assess their diets. Great barracuda Sphyraena barracuda had the largest estimated population at 190 individuals, followed by 89 giant trevally Caranx ignobilis and 19 bluefin trevally Caranx melampygus. The three species were caught throughout the pond, with C. ignobilis concentrated in the deeper northwest area near a mangrove island. Diets of the three species consisted mainly of nearshore, estuarine fishes, and crustaceans. Prey taxonomic resolution was greatly improved with the use of genetic barcoding since most fish were too degraded to be visually identified. Trophic level calculations and isotopic niche breadth comparisons indicated that C. ignobilis and S. barracuda occupied similar ecological niches in the fishpond, and stable isotope mixing models revealed that their long‐term diets were mostly comprised glass shrimp (Palaemon sp.), mangrove swimming crab (Thalamita crenata), and an invasive Australian mullet (Osteomugil engeli). The native mullet (Mugil cephalus), a primary food fish species from the fishpond, was not identified in the diets of the predatory fishes in this study nor in a previous diet study decades ago prior to the introduction of Australian mullet. The inclusion of the invasive Australian mullet in the contemporary diets of the predatory fishes demonstrates a shift towards the newly available prey which may benefit the native mullet populations. These findings improve the understanding of food web dynamics in contemporary Hawaiian fishponds and provide an example of native predatory fishes consuming an invasive species as part of their diets.

What Is Already Known About This Topic: Lead (Pb) and cadmium (Cd) are widespread toxic heavy metal pollutants in the environment. Dietary intakes of Pb and Cd have been a major concern in the world., What Is Added by This Report?: The average dietary exposure to Pb and Cd among Chinese adult males from the Sixth China Total Diet Study (TDS) was within acceptable levels, except for a potential health risk of Cd exposure among adult men in Hunan Province., What Are the Implications for Public Health Practice?: It is necessary to continuously monitor the levels of Pb and Cd in foods. More attention should be paid to dietary Cd exposure in Hunan Province., Competing Interests: The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright and License information: Editorial Office of CCDCW, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention 2022.)

What Is Already Known About This Topic?: Perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) are persistent organic pollutants, which have multi-organ toxicity and potential health risk to humans., What Is Added by This Report?: The most commonly detected PFASs in the Sixth China Total Diet Study (TDS) samples were perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluoroundecanoic acid (PFUdA), perfluorodecanoic acid (PFDA), perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA), and 9-chlorohexadecafluoro-3-oxanonane-1-sulfonate (6:2 Cl-PFESA). The mean estimated weekly intakes (EWIs) of PFOA, PFOS, and 6:2 Cl-PFESA in the Sixth TDS were 2.17, 2.72, and 2.75 ng/kg body weight per week, respectively., What Are the Implications for Public Health Practice?: The PFASs levels in some food category and dietary exposure still need to be continuously monitored, especially for 6:2 Cl-PFESA., Competing Interests: No conflicts of interest. Table S1The mean and median concentrations (ng/g wet weight) and DF of other PFASs in all food samplesFood categoryPFHpAPFOA*PFNAPFDAPFUdAPFDoAPFTrDAPFTeDAPFBSPFPeSPFHxSPFOS*6:2 Cl-PFESA8:2 Cl-PFESAAbbreviations: PFHpA=perfluoroheptanoic acid; PFOA=perfluorooctanoic acid; PFNA=perfluorononanoic acid; PFDA=perfluorodecanoic acid; PFUdA=perfluoroundecanoic acid; PFDoA=perfluorododecanoic acid; PFTrDA=perfluorotridecanoic acid; PFTeDA=perfluorotetradecanoic acid; PFBS=perfluorobutanesulfonate; PFPeS=perfluoropentanesulfonate; PFHxS=perfluorohexanesulfonate; PFOS=perfluorooctanesulfonate; 6:2 Cl-PFESA= 9-chlorohexadecafluoro-3-oxanonane-1-sulfonate; 8:2 Cl-PFESA=11-chloroeicosafluoro-3-oxaundecane-1-sulfonate; PLADs=provincial-level administrative division. * the concentration of PFOA/PFOS included linear PFOA/PFOS and br-PFOA/PFOS. † no data. MeatsDF (%)12.575.041.733.341.78.316.70.04.20.04.279.241.74.2Range<0.002 to 0.09 <0.006 to 0.15 <0.002 to 0.03 <0.002 to 0.04 <0.002 to 0.05 <0.003 to 0.01 <0.003 to 0.03 −†<0.003− 0.12 −†<0.003 to 0.05 <0.004 to 0.53 <0.004 to 3.73 <0.004 to 0.07 Means0.010.040.010.010.01<0.0030.01−†0.01−†0.0040.060.170.005Median<0.0020.029<0.002<0.002<0.002<0.003<0.003−†<0.003−†<0.0030.021<0.004<0.004EggsDF (%)0.083.329.254.245.84.212.512.50.08.38.395.829.20.0Range−†<0.001 to 2.97 <0.001 to 0.02 <0.001 to 0.07 <0.001 to 0.02 <0.001 to 0.01 <0.001 to 0.02 <0.001 to 0.01 −†<0.002 to 0.01 <0.001 to 0.02 <0.002 to 0.19 <0.001 to 0.04 −†Means−†0.180.0040.010.01<0.0010.0020.002−†<0.0020.0020.070.01−†Median−†0.020<0.0010.01<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001−†<0.002<0.0010.06<0.001−†Aquat−†DF (%)4.266.791.7100.0100.0100.0100.075.08.34.20.0100.0100.025.0Range<0.001 to 0.03 <0.002 to 0.26 <0.001 to 0.29 0.022 to 0.52 0.033 to 0.32 0.009 to 0.15 0.022 to 0.27 <0.003 to 0.07 <0.002 to 0.02 <0.002 to 0.01 −†0.059 to 4.30 0.008 to 0.49 <0.002 to 0.15 Means0.0020.050.060.090.150.040.110.02<0.002<0.002−†0.480.140.01Median<0.0010.020.050.060.120.040.080.02<0.002<0.002−†0.290.10<0.002CerealsDF (%)4.212.50.04.20.00.00.00.012.54.28.34.20.00.0Range<0.001 to 0.03 <0.001 to 0.09 −†<0.005 to 0.01 −†−†−†−†<0.001 to 0.04 <0.005 to 0.11 <0.005 to 0.16 <0.001 to 0.01 −†−†Means0.0020.01−†<0.005−†−†−†−†0.0040.010.01<0.001−†−†Median<0.001<0.001−†<0.005−†−†−†−†<0.001<0.005<0.005<0.001−†−†LegumesDF (%)4.212.50.04.20.04.20.04.216.78.312.54.20.00.0Range<0.015 to 0.21 <0.005 to 0.06 −†<0.004 to 0.01 −†<0.015 to 0.02 −†<0.015 to 0.03 <0.010 to 0.23 <0.010 to 0.06 <0.010 to 0.11 <0.005 to 0.08 −†−†Means0.020.01−†<0.004−†<0.015−†<0.0150.02<0.0100.01<0.010−†−†Median<0.015<0.005−†<0.004−†<0.015−†<0.015<0.010<0.010<0.010<0.010−†−†PotatoesDF (%)0.016.70.012.54.28.30.00.016.712.54.20.00.00.0Range−†<0.001 to 0.05 −†<0.002 to 0.02 <0.002 to 0.02 <0.004 to 0.02 −†−†<0.002 to 0.03 <0.002 to 0.02 <0.002 to 0.02 −†−†−†Means−†0.004−†0.003<0.002<0.004−†−†0.010.003<0.002−†−†−†Median−†<0.001−†<0.002<0.002<0.004−†−†<0.001<0.002<0.002−†−†−†VegetablesDF (%)0.020.80.08.38.38.30.00.00.037.54.20.00.00.0Range−†<0.006 to 0.04 −†<0.006 to 0.02 <0.004 to 0.01 <0.005 to 0.03 −†−†−†<0.010 to 0.05 <0.006 to 0.03 −†−†−†Means−†0.01−†<0.006<0.004<0.005−†−†−†0.02<0.006−†−†−†Median−†<0.006−†<0.006<0.004<0.005−†−†−†<0.010<0.006−†−†−†FruitsDF (%)0.00.00.00.00.08.30.00.00.00.00.04.20.00.0Range−†−†−†−†−†<0.002 to 0.02 −†−†−†−†−†<0.002 to 0.01 −†−†Means−†−†−†−†−†<0.002−†−†−†−†−†<0.002−†−†Median−†−†−†−†−†<0.002−†−†−†−†−†<0.002−†−†, (Copyright and License information: Editorial Office of CCDCW, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention 2022.)