|
|
||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Abstract
In Westernized societies average consumption of n-6
polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) far exceeds
nutritional requirements. The ratio of n-6 to n-3 PUFAs is
generally >10:1 whereas on a primitive human diet it was
closer to 1:1. Diets fed to intensively farmed livestock
have followed a similar trend. Both n-6 and n-3 PUFAs can
influence reproductive processes through a variety of
mechanisms. They provide the precursors for prostaglandin
synthesis and can modulate the expression patterns of many
key enzymes involved in both prostaglandin and steroid
metabolism. They are essential components of all cell
membranes. The proportions of different PUFAs in tissues
of the reproductive tract reflect dietary consumption.
PUFA supplements (particularly n-3 PUFAs in fish oil) are
promoted for general health reasons. Fish oils may also
benefit fertility in cattle and reduce the risk of preterm
labor in women, but in both cases current evidence to
support this is inconclusive. Gamma-linolenic acid
containing oils can alter the types of prostaglandins
produced by cells in vitro, but published data to support
claims relating to effects on reproductive health are
lacking. Spermatozoa require a high PUFA content to
provide the plasma membrane with the fluidity essential at
fertilization. This however makes spermatozoa particularly
vulnerable to attack by reactive oxygen species, and
lifestyle factors promoting oxidative stress have clear
associations with reduced fertility. Adequately powered
trials which control for the ratios of different PUFAs
consumed are required to determine the extent to which
this aspect of our diets does influence our fertility.
Key words:
Female Reproductive Tract
Parturition
Sperm
Steroid hormones
Prostaglandins
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M Zachut, A Arieli, H Lehrer, N Argov, and U Moallem Dietary unsaturated fatty acids influence preovulatory follicle characteristics in dairy cows Reproduction, May 1, 2008; 135(5): 683 - 692. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH |