L‐Carnitine metabolism, protein turnover and energy expenditure in supplemented and exercised Labrador Retrievers
Jessica Lyn Varney 17 June 2020
L‐Carnitine is critical for protection against bioaccumulation, long‐chain fatty acid transportation and energy production. Energy production becomes important as the body maintains lean mass, repairs muscles and recovers from oxidative stress. The aim was to investigate the effects of supplemented L‐carnitine on protein turnover (PT), energy expenditure (EE) and carnitine metabolism in muscle/serum of Labrador Retrievers. In a series of experiments, all dogs were fed a low‐carnitine diet and sorted into one of two groups: L‐carnitine (LC) supplemented daily with 125 mg L‐carnitine and 3.75 g sucrose or placebo (P) supplemented with 4 g sucrose daily. The experiments consisted of analyses of muscle/serum for L‐carnitine content (EXP1), a protein turnover experiment (EXP2) and analysis of substrate utilization via indirect calorimetry (EXP3). EXP1: 20 Labradors (10 M/10 F) performed a 13 week running regimen. L‐Carnitine content was analysed in the serum and biceps femoris muscle before/after a 24.1 km run. LC serum had higher total (p < .001; p = .001), free (p < .001; p = .001) and esterified (p = .001; p = .003) L‐carnitine pre‐ and post‐run respectively. LC muscle had significantly higher free L‐carnitine post‐run (p = .034). EXP2: 26 Labs (13 M/13 F) performed a 60‐day running regimen. For the final run, half of the Labradors from each treatment rested and half ran 24.1 km. Twenty‐four Labradors received isotope infusion, and then, a biopsy of the biceps femoris of all 26 Labradors was taken to determine PT. Resting/exercised LC had a lower fractional breakdown rate (FBR) versus P group (p = .042). LC females had a lower FBR v. P females (p = .046). EXP3: Respiration of 16 Labradors (8 M/8 F) was measured via indirect calorimetry over 15 week. All dogs ran on a treadmill for 30 min at 30% VO2 max (6.5 kph), resulting in higher maximum and mean EE in LC females v. P females (p = .021; p = .035). Implications for theory, practice and future research are discussed.