Fig. 3: Dietary intervention with McB blunts progression of insulin resistance and fat mass accumulation.

A–C Oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and 5 h fasting blood glucose prior to dietary intervention (Week 11) and 5 weeks post intervention (Week 12 + 5) of LFD (A), WD_CNTL (B), and WD_McB (C) groups. D–F Glucose-stimulated insulin concentration during OGTT and 5 h fasting insulin levels prior to dietary intervention (Week 11) and 5 weeks post intervention (Week 12 + 5) of LFD (D), WD_CNTL (E), and WD_McB (F) groups. G Intraperitoneal insulin tolerance test (ITT) 3 weeks post dietary intervention. H Body weight development. Mice were fed either LFD or WD_REF the first 12 weeks followed by 6 week dietary intervention period. Dotted vertical line depicts intervention start. I Fat mass in gram through the dietary intervention period (Week 12 + 0 to 12 + 6) measured by MR scan. J Feed intake per cage as average grams per mouse during 48 h. K Fecal content of fat and protein. L NAFLD activity score based on hepatic steatosis grade (0–3), inflammation (0–2), and hepatocellular ballooning (0–3) graded by blinded histological assessment of liver tissue. M One representative H&E stained picture per group out of 6 (LFD) or 13 (WD_McB and WD_CNTL) liver tissue sections. A, F n = 6 (LFD) and 15 (WD_McB and WD_CNTL) except for F timepoint 60–120 min at Week 11 where n = 14, 12, and 12, respectively due to insufficient sample material. Statistical significance within each timepoint is indicated by p values at paired two-way ANOVA-RM with Bonferroni post-hoc test. Fasting glucose and insulin levels were evaluated by paired t-tests. Lines indicate group means and dots represents individual data points. G n = 8 (WD_McB) and 9 (WD_CNTL). WD_McB was compared to WD_CNTL by two-way ANOVA-RM with Bonferroni post-hoc test. Lines indicate group means and dots represents individual data points. H–I n = 6 (LFD) or 15 (WD_McB and WD_CNTL). LFD and WD_McB were compared to WD_CNTL by two-way ANOVA-RM, adjusted for multiple comparisons by Dunnett’s post-hoc. Lines indicate group means and dots represents individual data points. J, K Each data point represents the average of one cage. n = 2 (LFD) to 5 (WD_McB and WD_CNTL). LFD and WD_McB were compared to WD_CNTL by one-way ANOVA, adjusted for multiple comparisons by Dunnett’s post-hoc. Dot shapes indicate individuals data points in Exp1 (squares) and Exp2 (circles). L Bars represent median and interquartile range and dots represents individual data points. All p-values < 1 × 10⁻¹ between WD_CNTL and indicated group are depicted. Dot shapes indicate individuals data points in Exp1 (squares) and Exp2 (circles). LFD and WD_McB were compared to WD_CNTL by Kruskal–Wallis, adjusted for multiple comparisons by Dunn’s post-hoc. n = 6 (LFD) or 13 (WD_McB and WD_CNTL). A–L All p-values < 1 × 10⁻¹ between WD_CNTL and indicated group are depicted.