ISSN 2415-3060 (print), ISSN 2522-4972 (online)
  • 27 of 42
JMBS 2017, 2(4): 148–154

Influence of Dietary Yeast Restriction on Pathological Changes in the Body of the Fruit Fly under High Consumption of Amylose Starch

Abrat O. B., Didukh J. O.

Nutrition is one of the important factors that affect both the longevity and quality of life. It is known that an excessive intake of all macronutrients, particularly carbohydrates, contributes to the development of obesity and oxidative damage. Hovewer, the nutritional properties of carbohydrates depend not only on their quantity, but also on the rate and extent of their digestion and absorption. Based on clinical and animal research, polysaccharide amylose starch had been proposed to be the most potentially beneficial starch fraction for human health. We aimed to study the safety of this fraction of starch for fruit fly, which is recognized to be a good model to study diseases associated with high carbohydrate consumption. It is known that the molecular mechanisms which regulate quality of life in both invertebrates and vertebrates are not only limited to the excessive consumption of carbohydrates, but also depend on amount of protein components. Thus, in our work we manipulated the macronutrient composition of the food by varying levels of amylase starch (carbohydrate) and yeast (protein). The D. melanogaster strain w1118 was obtained from Bloomington Stock Center (Bloomington, Indiana, USA). Experimental media contained 0.18% nipagin (v/v), 1% agar (w/v), 5% or 20% (w/v) amylose starch and yeast in a range of concentrations: 1%, 5%, 10% and 15% (w/v). Developmental survival was assessed as amount of eggs which were able to reach pupa stage. Median pupation time was calculated as the time at which 50% of total larvae had pupated (PT50). The pupation height was measured as the distance from the food surface. Triacylglyceride (TAG) levels were measured using a diagnostic kit Liquick Cor-TG (P.Z. Cormay S.A., Poland) following kit guidelines. Lipid hydroperoxides (LOOH) content was assayed by FOX method. The results of our study showed that diets with high concentrations of amylose starch (20%) and protein restriction (1%) significantly prolonged development time and delay pupation height in D. melanogaster, as compared to all other groups. In these conditions (20% starch and 1% yeast) we observed TAG accumulation in eight day-old-females. There was positive correlation between the levels of LOOH and consumed carbohydrate in two day-old-flies of both sexes under condition of protein restriction. However, consumption of diet with excessive amount of carbohydrate and middle (5-10%) or high (15%) protein content had no effect on the development and concentrations of TAG and LOOH in the body of fruit flies. In conclusion, we want to resume that a sufficient amount of protein in the diet reduces the negative effects of high-dose amylose starch.

Keywords: Drosophila melanogaster, slowly digestible starch, pupation, triacylglycerides, lipid peroxides

Full text: PDF (Ukr) 353K

  1. Abrat O. Influence of amylose starch on development and lifespan of fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster. JPNU. 2015; 2 (1): 100–6.
  2. Aller E, Abete I, Astrup A, Martinez JA, van Baak MA. Starches, sugars and obesity. Nutrients. 2011; 3 (3): 341–69.
  3. Diop S, Bisharat-Kernizan J, Birse R, Oldham S, Ocorr K, Bodmer R. PGC-1/Spargel counteracts high-fat-diet-induced obesity and cardiac lipotoxicity downstream of TOR and Brummer ATGL lipase. Cell Rep. 2015; 10 (9): 1572–84.
  4. Guarente L. Calorie restriction and sirtuins revisited. Genes Dev. 2013; 27 (19): 2072–85.
  5. Heinrichsen E, Zhang H, Robinson J, Ngo J, Diop S, Bodmer R, Joiner WJ, Metallo CM2, Haddad GG. Metabolic and transcriptional response to a high-fat diet in Drosophila. Mol Metab. 2014; 3 (1): 42–54.
  6. Hermes-Lima M, Willmore W, Storey K. Quantification of lipid peroxidation in tissue extracts based on Fe(III) xylenol orange complex. Free Radical Biol Med. 1995; 19 (3): 271–80.
  7. Hong J, Park K. Further understanding of fat biology: lessons from a fat fly. Exp Mol Med. 2010; 42 (1): 12–20.
  8. Kanasaki K, Koya D. Biology of obesity: lessons from animal models of obesity. J Biomed Biotechnol. 2011; 2011: 197636.
  9. Lee K, Simpson S, Clissold F, Brooks R, Ballard JWO, Taylor PW, Soran N, Raubenheimer D. Lifespan and reproduction in Drosophila: new insights from nutritional geometry. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2008; 105 (7): 2498–503.
  10. Li B, Andrews K, Pehrsson P. Individual sugars, soluble, and insoluble dietary fiber contents of 70 high consumption foods. J Food Compos anal. 2002; 15 (6): 715–23.
  11. Lozinsky O, Lushchak O, Storey J, Lushchak V. The mitochondrial uncoupler 2,4-dinitrophenol attenuates sodium nitroprusside-induced toxicity in Drosophila melanogaster: Potential involvement of free radicals. Comp Biochem Physiol Part C: Toxicol Pharmacol. 2013; 158 (4): 244–52.
  12. Lushchak V. Adaptive response to oxidative stress: Bacteria, fungi, plants and animals. Comp Biochem Physiol C Toxicol Pharmacol. 2011; 153 (2): 175–90.
  13. Musselman L, Fink J, Narzinski K, Ramachandran PV, Hathiramani SS, Cagan RL, Baranski TJ. A high-sugar diet produces obesity and insulin resistance in wild-type Drosophila. Dis Model Mech. 2011; 4 (6): 842–9.
  14. Musselman L, Fink J, Ramachandran P, Patterson BW, Okunade AL, Maier E, Brent MR, Turk J, Baranski TJ. Role of fat body lipogenesis in protection against the effects of caloric overload in Drosophila. J Biol Chem. 2013; 288 (12): 8028–42.
  15. Pasco M, Léopold P. High sugar-induced insulin resistance in Drosophila relies on the lipocalin Neural Lazarillo. PLoS One. 2012; 7 (5): e36583.
  16. Piper M, Partridge L, Raubenheimer D, Simpson S. Dietary restriction and aging: a unifying perspective. Cell metabolism. 2011; 14 (2): 154–60.
  17. Rajan A, Perrimon N. Of flies and men: insights on organismal metabolism from fruit flies. BMC Biol. 2013; 11 (1): 38.
  18. Rovenko B, Kubrak O, Gospodaryov D, Perkhulyn NV, Yurkevych IS, Sanz A, Lushchak OV, Lushchak VI. High sucrose consumption promotes obesity whereas its low consumption induces oxidative stress in Drosophila melanogaster. J Insect Physiol. 2015; 79: 42–54.
  19. Sajilata M, Singhal R, Kulkarni P. Resistant starch–a review. Comp Rev Food Sci Food Safety. 2006; 5 (1): 1–17.
  20. Scialo F, Mallikarjun V, Stefanatos R, Sanz A. Regulation of lifespan by the mitochondrial electron transport chain: reactive oxygen species-dependent and reactive oxygen species-independent mechanisms. Antioxid Redox Signal. 2013; 19 (16): 1953–69.
  21. Skorupa D, Dervisefendic A, Zwiener J, Pletcher S. Dietary composition specifies consumption, obesity, and lifespan in Drosophila melanogaster. Aging cell. 2008; 7 (4): 478–90.
  22. Smith W, Thomas J, Liu J, Li T, Moran TH. From fat fruit fly to human obesity. Physiol Behav. 2014; 136: 15–21.
  23. Sokolowski M. Genetics and ecology of Drosophila melanogaster larval foraging and pupation behaviour. J Insect Physiol. 1985; 31 (11): 857–64.
  24. Stanhope K. Sugar consumption, metabolic disease and obesity: The state of the controversy. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci. 2015; 53 (1): 1–16.
  25. Tapsell L. Diet and metabolic syndrome: where does resistant starch fit in? J AOAC Int. 2004; 87 (3): 756–60.
  26. Teleman A. Molecular mechanisms of metabolic regulation by insulin in Drosophila. Biochem J. 2009; 425 (1): 13–26.
  27. Teleman A, Ratzenbock I, Oldham S. Drosophila: a model for understanding obesity and diabetic complications. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 2012; 120 (4): 184–5.
  28. Valko M, Leibfritz D, Moncol J, Cronin MT, Mazur M, Telser J. Free radicals and antioxidants in normal physiological functions and human disease. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2007; 39 (1): 44–84.
  29. Vellai T, Takacs-Vellai K. Regulation of protein turnover by longevity pathways. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2010; 694: 69–80.
  30. Yu BP. Cellular defenses against damage from reactive oxygen species. Physiol Rev. 1994; 74 (1): 139–63.