Extending food deprivation reverses the short-term lipolytic response to fasting: role of the triacylglycerol/fatty acid cycle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of short-term food deprivation on lipid metabolism are well documented, but little is known about prolonged fasting. This study monitored the kinetics of glycerol (rate of appearance, R(a) glycerol) and non-esterified fatty acids (R(a) NEFA) in fasting rabbits. Our goals were to determine whether lipolysis is stimulated beyond values seen for short-term fasting, and to characterize the roles of primary (intracellular) and secondary (with transit through the circulation) triacylglycerol/fatty acid cycling (TAG/FA cycling) in regulating fatty acid allocation to oxidation or re-esterification. R(a) glycerol (9.62±0.72 to 15.29±0.96 μmol kg(-1) min(-1)) and R(a) NEFA (18.05±2.55 to 31.25±1.93 μmol kg(-1) min(-1)) were stimulated during the first 2 days of fasting, but returned to baseline after 4 days. An initial increase in TAG/FA cycling was followed by a reduction below baseline after 6 days without food, with primary and secondary cycling contributing to these responses. We conclude that the classic activation of lipolysis caused by short-term fasting is abolished when food deprivation is prolonged. High rates of re-esterification may become impossible to sustain, and TAG/FA cycling could decrease to reduce its cost to 3% of total energy expenditure. Throughout prolonged fasting, fatty acid metabolism gradually shifts towards increased oxidation and reduced re-esterification. Survival is achieved by pressing fuel selection towards the fatty acid dominance of energy metabolism and by slowing substrate cycles to assist metabolic suppression. However, TAG/FA cycling remains active even after prolonged fasting, suggesting that re-esterification is a crucial mechanism that cannot be stopped without harmful consequences.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".