## 3 Results
Figure 2: Intake of diet (g) of rats fed AIN\({}_{\text{ch}}\), WD\({}_{\text{ch}}\) (Western diet) or LCHP\({}_{\text{ch}}\) (low-carbohydrate–high-protein) diets enriched with 1% cholesterol during the experiment (0–8 weeks). As shown in Table 4, a statistically significant increase in serum ALT was observed in the LCHP\({}_{\text{ch}}\) group compared to the AIN\({}_{\text{ch}}\)-fed rats, whereas AST activity remained unchanged. No significant changes (\(p>0.05\)) in serum creatinine concentrations as well as glucose fasting levels between all experimental groups were observed. It was shown (see Table 5 and Figure 3) that both the WD\({}_{\text{ch}}\) and LCHP\({}_{\text{ch}}\) diets significantly changed the fatty acid profile in adipose tissue of rats compared to AIN\({}_{\text{ch}}\)-Myristic acid, palmitic acid, margaric acid, stearic acid and vaccenic acid were increased in both WD\({}_{\text{ch}}\) and LCHP\({}_{\text{ch}}\) rats, but linoleic acid and linolenic acid were decreased. SFA as well as MUFA were significantly increased in WD\({}_{\text{ch}}\) and LCHP\({}_{\text{ch}}\), but PUFA was decreased (\(p<0.05\)). After 8 weeks of feeding, animals fed the LCHP\({}_{\text{ch}}\) or WD\({}_{\text{ch}}\) diet had more (\(p<0.05\)) fat in their livers than the AIN\({}_{\text{ch}}\) group (4.2- or 3.5-fold higher values, respectively) (Figure 4). Histological analysis confirmed the above observation. Liver steatosis was observed in rats fed WD\({}_{\text{ch}}\) as well as in LCHP\({}_{\text{ch}}\) diets (Figure 5b,c, respectively). Results of calculation for ORO staining/tissue area (%) were 3.25 \(\pm\) 2.67, 11.64 \(\pm\) 3.43 and 31.91 \(\pm\) 14.75 in AIN\({}_{\text{ch}}\), WD\({}_{\text{ch}}\) and LCHP\({}_{\text{ch}}\) groups, respectively (Figure 6). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Parameter [Unit]**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Experimental Groups**} \\ \cline{2-4}  & **AIN\({}_{\text{ch}}\)** & **WD\({}_{\text{ch}}\)** & **LCHP\({}_{\text{ch}}\)** \\ \hline TCH\({}_{1/2}\) [mmol/L] & 1.5 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.4 & 2.1 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.8 & 1.8 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.2 \\ TCH [mmol/L] & 1.4 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.2 & 2.3 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.3 & 2.1 \({}^{\text{ab}}\)\(\pm\) 0.5 \\ TAG\({}_{1/2}\) [mmol/L] & 1.2 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.4 & 3.5 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.9 & 2.1 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 1.1 \\ TAG [mmol/L] & 1.9 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.8 & 3.5 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.9 & 2.2 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.7 \\ HDL\({}_{1/2}\) [mmol/L] & 1.0 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.1 & 1.1 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.2 & 1.1 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.1 \\ HDL [mmol/L] & 1.2 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.2 & 1.2 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.3 & 1.2 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.1 \\ LDL + VLDL\({}_{1/2}\) & 0.4 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.1 & 1.2 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.2 & 0.8 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.1 \\ LDL + VLDL & 0.3 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.2 & 0.9 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.3 & 1.0 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.1 \\
[mmol/L] & 0.4 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.1 & 1.2 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.5 & 0.7 \({}^{\text{ab}}\)\(\pm\) 0.2 \\ AI & 0.2 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.1 & 0.8 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.3 & 0.9 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.4 \\ TCH/HDL\({}_{1/2}\) & 1.4 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.4 & 2.2 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.5 & 1.7 \({}^{\text{ab}}\)\(\pm\) 0.2 \\ TCH/HDL & 1.2 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.1 & 1.8 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.3 & 1.9 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.4 \\ TAG/HDL\({}_{1/2}\) & 1.1 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.4 & 3.3 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 1.1 & 2.0 \({}^{\text{ab}}\)\(\pm\) 1.3 \\ TAG/HDL & 1.7 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.7 & 3.0 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.9 & 1.9 \({}^{\text{ab}}\)\(\pm\) 0.6 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Data are means \(\pm\) SD. The means marked with letters \({}^{\text{a}}\) and \({}^{\text{b}}\) (in each line) are significantly different (\(p<0.05\)).  
\end{table}