Intermittent energy restriction vs. continuous energy restriction on cardiometabolic risk factors in patients with metabolic syndrome: a meta-analysis and systematic review

BackgroundThis is a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of intermittent energy restriction (IER) vs. continuous energy restriction (CER) on weight loss, body composition, blood pressure, and other cardiometabolic risk factors in patients with metabolic syndrome (MetS) risk factors.MethodsWe searched and screened PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from inception to May 8, 2022 for randomized controlled trials. Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data, assessed quality and risk of bias and cross-checked extracts to resolve discrepancies when required. We expressed effect size as mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The major outcome was the improvement of MetS risk factors, including changes in waist circumference (WC), triglycerides (TG), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-c), blood pressure (BP), and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels. The secondary outcomes were body weight (BW), body mass index (BMI), body fat (BF), fat free mass (FFM), hip circumference (HC), fasting insulin (FINs), total cholesterol (TC), and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c).ResultsThe meta-analysis included 16 articles (20 trials) with a total of 1,511 participants. All studies had a low risk of bias for random sequence generation. The IER and CER intervention equally improved MetS risk factors WC (MD = −0.47, 95% CI [−1.19, 0.25]), TG (MD = −0.02 mmol/L, 95% CI [−0.11, 0.07]), FPG (MD = −0.02 mmol/L, 95% CI [−0.10, 0.05]) and BP (systolic blood pressure: MD = 0.93 mmHg, 95% CI [−2.74, 4.61]; diastolic blood pressure: MD =1.15 mmHg, 95% CI [−0.24, 2.55]), but HDL-c (MD = 0.03 mmol/L, 95% CI [0.01, 0.05]) was significant improved in IER when compared with CER. For second outcomes, BW (MD = −0.8 kg, 95% CI [−1.26, −0.33]), BF (MD = −0.75 kg, 95% CI [−1.73, −0.13]) and FFM (MD = −0.49 kg, 95% CI [−0.92, −0.05]) were also significant improved in IER, and not for other outcomes.ConclusionBoth IER and CER could improve MetS biomarkers, but IER was more effective than CER in the improvement of HDL-c only. For secondary outcomes, IER was also more effective for BW, BF and FFM, but there were no differences in effects for other outcomes

Effects of environmental factors on growth, survival, and metamorphosis of geoduck clam (Panopea japonica A. Adams, 1850) larvae

A series of experiments were conducted to evaluate the effects of temperature, salinity, diet, and stocking density on the growth, survival, and metamorphosis of geoduck clam Panopea japonica larvae. The larvae all died at a temperature of 22 °C after day 12, suggesting that the larvae of P. japonica could not survive when the temperature was higher than 22 °C. P. japonica could be incubated at 19 °C for the fast growth, high survival and metamorphosis of larvae. The embryos all died when the salinity was below 25 ppt. The larvae showed poor survival when the salinity was below 25 ppt, with all larvae dying before day 12, suggesting that larvae are sensitive to low salinity. The optimum salinity for the growth, survival and metamorphosis of larvae was 32 ppt. The use of a mixture of Isochrysis galbana and Nitzschia closterium (1:1) as a food source for the P. japonica larvae improved their growth, survival, and metamorphosis. A density of 20 individuals/ml appeared to be optimal for normal D-larvae of Panopea japonica, and 3–9 larvae/ml was optimal for the growth and survival of the P. japonica larvae raised in the hatchery