Fig 2: Effects of MJ2 and hkMJ2 on adipogenesis, lipogenesis, lipolysis, and fatty acid ß-oxidation in eWAT. The mRNA was extracted from the eWAT of each group, and gene expression levels of (A) adipogenic (PPAR? and C/EBPa), (B) lipogenic (FAS, SCD-1, and ACC), (C) lipolytic (ATGL and HSL), and (D) fatty acid ß-oxidation (CPT-1 and ACOX1) factors related to lipid metabolism were analyzed by qPCR. The data indicate the mean ± SD. The p values were determined by ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD test.

Fig 3: MHC-ATGL mice are resistant to burn-induced cardiac injury. (a–f) Blood markers of cardiac injury were compared between WT and MHC-ATGL Het mice with or without burn challenge; n = 8 - 36. (g, h) Representative images and quantitative analysis showing cardiac apoptosis using TUNEL staining in WT and MHC-ATGL Het mice with or without burn challenge. Bar: 20 µm; n = 8. Data are shown as the mean ± SEM. * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, and *** P < 0.001. P values were derived from one-way ANOVA with the appropriate posttest.

Fig 4: ATGL haploinsufficiency could not alleviate burn-induced cardiac lipid accumulation. (a) Identification of WT and ATGL-Het mice by PCR analysis. (b, c) Immunoblot analysis showing ATGL protein expression in WT and ATGL-Het mice; n = 6. (d, e) Analysis comparing serum TG and FFA between WT and ATGL-Het mice with or without burn injury; n = 17 - 32. (f, g) Cardiac TG and FFA were compared between WT and ATGL-Het mice with or without burn challenge; n = 10 - 25. Het denotes ATGL-Het. Data are shown as the mean ± SEM. * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, and *** P < 0.001. P values were derived from two-tailed Student's t-test (c) or one-way ANOVA with the appropriate posttest (d–g).

Fig 5: Partial loss of ATGL does not protect against burn-induced cardiac dysfunction. (a–f) Blood markers of cardiac damage were compared between WT and ATGL-Het mice with or without burn challenge; n = 14 - 34. (g, h) Representative images and quantitative analysis showing cardiac apoptosis using TUNEL staining in WT and ATGL-Het mice with or without burn injury. Bar: 20 µm; n = 8. Data are shown as the mean ± SEM. * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, and *** P < 0.001. P values were derived from one-way ANOVA with the appropriate posttest.