Differential Deleterious Impact of Highly Saturated Versus Monounsaturated Fat Intake on Vascular Function, Structure, and Mechanics in Mice

Figure 1. Body weight and biochemical parameters. Bar graphs showing body weight (a) and plasmatic concentrations of glucose (b), non-esterified free-fatty acids (NEFA); (c) and triglycerides (d). Data are shown as mean ± SEM of 7–10 animals per strain. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 vs. the control group SD.

Figure 2. Characterization of vascular function. Concentration–response curves to (a) phenylephrine (Phe, 10−8 to 10−6 M) and (b) acetylcholine (Ach, 10−9 to 10−4 M) in aorta segments from standard (SD), unsaturated oil-enriched Food (UOLF), saturated oil-enriched Food (SOLF), and high-fat (HF) mice. Contractions are expressed in absolute values and relaxant responses are expressed as percentage of a previous contraction to Phe (10−6 M). Concentration–response curves to Phe (10−8 to 10−6 M) in aorta segments from SD (c), SOLF (d), UOLF (e), and HF mice (f) in absence and presence of L-NAME. (g) AUC in response to Phe in presence (full histogram) or absence (white bar) of L-NAME. The difference in AUC (black bar) represents NO bioavailability. Data are shown as mean ± SEM of 7–10 animals per group. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 vs. its corresponding control.

Figure 3. Characterization of structural parameters in first order mesenteric resistance arteries. (a) Vessel diameter–pressure, (b) lumen diameter–pressure, (c) wall thickness-pressure, (d) cross sectional area (CSA) pressure, and (e) media to lumen ratio-pressure of mesenteric resistance arteries (MRA) from SD, UOLF, SOLF, and HF mice. Results are expressed as mean ± SEM of n = 7–10. * p < 0.05 and *** p < 0.001 vs. the SD group.

Figure 4. Characterization of mechanical parameters in first-order mesenteric resistance arteries. (a) Wall stress-pressure, (b) strain-pressure, (c) incremental distensibility-pressure curves and (d) stress-strain relationships with β values of MRA from SD, UOLF, SOLF, and HF mice. Results are expressed as mean ± SEM of n = 7–10. * p < 0.05 vs. the SD group.

Figure 5. Elastin content and organization of external elastic laminae (EEL) in first-order MRA (a) Representative confocal microscopy images of projections of MRA’s EEL from SD, UOLF, SOLF, and HF mice. Projections were obtained from serial optical sections captured with a fluorescence confocal microscope (x63 oil immersion objective, zoom 2). (b) Bar graphs show fluorescence intensity, indicative of elastin content in EEL from SD, UOLF, SOLF, and HF animals. Results are expressed as mean ± SEM of n = 4–10.

Figure 6. Elastin content and organization of internal elastic laminae (IEL) in first-order MRA. (a) Representative confocal microscopy images of projections of MRA’s IEL from SD, UOLF, SOLF, and HF mice. Projections were obtained from serial optical sections captured with a fluorescence confocal microscope (x63 oil immersion objective, zoom 2). Bar graphs show (b) fluorescence intensity, indicative of elastin content in the IEL, (c) fenestrae number, and (d) fenestrae area in MRA from SD, UOLF, SOLF, and HF animals. Results are expressed as mean ± SEM of n = 4–10. * p < 0.05 vs. the SD group.

Figure 7. Collagen content in superior mesenteric arteries. Collagen content in the superior mesenteric artery from SD, UOLF, SOLF and HF mice. Results are expressed as mean ± SEM of n = 6. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 vs. the SD group.