Current nutrient requirement models assume fixed efficiencies of absorbed amino acid (AA) conversion to milk protein. Regulation of mammary protein synthesis (PS) potentially violates this assumption by changing the relationship between AA supply and milk protein output. The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of essential AA (EAA) and insulin on cellular signaling and PS rates in bovine mammary cells. MAC-T cells were subjected to 0 or 100% of normal EAA concentrations in DMEM/F12 and 0 or 100 μg insulin/L in a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement of treatments. Lactogenic bovine mammary tissue slices (MTS) were subjected to the same treatments, except low-EAA was 5% of normal DMEM/F12 concentrations. In MAC-T cells, EAA increased phosphorylation of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR; Ser2448), ribosomal protein S6 kinase 1 (S6K1; Thr389), eIF4E binding protein 1 (4EBP1; Thr37/46), and insulin receptor substrate 1 (IRS1; Ser1101), and reduced phosphorylation of eukaryotic elongation factor 2 (eEF2; Thr56) and eukaryotic initiation factor (eIF) 2-α (Ser51). In the presence of insulin, phosphorylation of Akt (Ser473), mTOR, S6K1, 4EBP1, and IRS1 increased in MAC-T cells. In MTS, EAA had similar effects on phosphorylation of signaling proteins and increased mammary PS rates. Insulin did not affect MTS signaling, perhaps due to inadequate levels. Effects of EAA and insulin were independent and additive for mTOR signaling in MAC-T cells. EAA did not inhibit insulin stimulation of Akt phosphorylation. PS rates were strongly associated with phosphorylation of 4EBP1 and eEF2 in MTS. EAA availability affected translation initiation and elongation control points to more strongly regulate PS than insulin.
When fed to meet the metabolizable protein requirements of the National Research Council, dairy cows consume an excess of N, resulting in approximately 75% of dietary N being lost to the environment as urine and feces. Reductions in environmental N release could be attained through an improvement in N efficiency. The objective of this study was to determine if the predicted reduction in milk yield associated with feeding a low-protein diet to lactating dairy cows could be avoided by dietary supplementation with 1 or more ruminally protected (RP) AA. Fourteen multiparous and 10 primiparous Holstein cows, and 24 multiparous Holstein × Jersey crossbred cows were used in a Youden square design consisting of 8 treatments and 3 periods. The 8 dietary treatments were (1) a standard diet containing 17% crude protein [CP; positive control (PC)], (2) a 15% CP diet [negative control (NC)], (3) NC plus RP Met (+M), (4) NC plus RP Lys (+K), (5) NC plus RP Leu (+L), (6) NC plus RP Met and Lys (+MK), (7) NC plus RP Met and Leu (+ML), and (8) NC plus RP Met, Lys, and Leu (+MKL). Dry matter intake was not affected by treatment. Crude protein intake was lower for NC and RP AA treatments compared with the PC treatment. No detrimental effect was detected of the low-CP diet alone or in combination with AA supplementation on milk and fat yield. However, milk protein yield decreased for NC and +MKL diets, and lactose yield decreased for the +MKL compared with the PC diet. Milk urea N concentrations were lower for all diets, suggesting that greater N efficiency was achieved by feeding the low-protein diet. Minimal effects of treatments on arterial plasma essential AA concentrations were detected, with only Ile and Val being significantly lower in the NC than in the PC diet. Phosphorylation ratios of signaling proteins known to regulate mRNA translation were not affected by treatments. This study highlights the limitations of requirement models aggregated at the protein level and the use of fixed postabsorptive efficiency to calculate milk protein requirements. Milk protein synthesis regulation by signaling pathways in vivo is still poorly understood.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.