Cited by 76Adipose Tissue and MetabolismAdipokines, Inflammation, and Metabolic DiseasesRegulation of Appetite and Obesity

Inactivity induces increases in abdominal fat

Laye, Matthew J., Thyfault, John P., Stump, Craig S., Booth, Frank W.·2007·Journal of Applied Physiology

Abstract

Previously, inducing inactivity for 53 h after 21 days of voluntary running resulted in a 25 and 48% increase in epididymal and omental fat pad weights, respectively, while rats continued to eat more than a group that never had access to a running wheel (J Physiol 565: 911-925, 2005). We wanted to test the hypothesis that inactivity, independent of excessive caloric intake, could induce an increase in fat pad mass. Twenty-one-day-old rats were given access to voluntary running wheels for 42-43 days so that they were running approximately 9 km/day in the last week of running, after which wheels were locked for 5, 53, or 173 h (WL5, WL53, WL173) before the rats were killed. During the 53 and 173 h of inactivity, one group of animals was pair fed (PF) to match sedentary controls, whereas the other continued to eat ad libitum (AL). Epididymal and retroperitoneal fat masses were significantly increased in the WL173-PF vs. the WL5 group, whereas epididymal, perirenal, and retroperitoneal fat masses were all significantly increased in the WL173-AL group compared with the WL5 group. Additionally, hyperplasia, and not hypertrophy, of the epididymal fat mass was responsible for the increase at WL173-AL as demonstrated by a significant increase in cell number vs. WL5, with no change in cell diameter or volume. Thus two important findings have been elucidated: 1) increases in measured abdominal fat masses occur in both AL and PF groups at WL173, and 2) adipocyte expansion via hyperplasia occurred with an ad libitum diet following cessation of voluntary running.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/japplphysiol.01018.2006

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • An association has been established between physical inactivity and visceral fat in both rodents and humans.

    “In fact, an association has been established between physical inactivity and visceral fat in both rodents (217) and humans (133, 218-220).”

    From Muscle–Organ Crosstalk: The Emerging Roles of Myokines (2020) · cites this paper as [217]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Laye, M. J., Thyfault, J. P., Stump, C. S., & Booth, F. W.
Affiliations
University of Missouri (US)
Venue
Journal of Applied Physiology
Published
2007-04
Volume
102
Issue
4
Pages
1341-1347
ISSN
  • 0161-7567 (ISSN-L)
  • 8750-7587
  • 1522-1601
OpenAlex
W2092137954
Cited by
76
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 7
FWCI
3.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Physiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of Missouri
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Adipose Tissue and Metabolism
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Adipokines, Inflammation, and Metabolic Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Regulation of Appetite and Obesity
Keywords
physical inactivity, abdominal fat, epididymal adipose tissue, omental fat, retroperitoneal fat, adipocyte hyperplasia, adipocyte hypertrophy, voluntary running, pair feeding, ad libitum feeding, energy balance
MeSH terms
Abdomen, Adaptation, Physiological, Adipose Tissue, Animals, Hyperplasia, Male, Motor Activity, Rats, Inbred BN, Rats, Inbred F344, Adiposity, Rats

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review