Skip to main content

LysoPC(16:0)


Basic information
Metabolite name

LysoPC(16:0)

N/A
C04230
N/A
Synonyms

LPC(16:0);
LPC 16:0 sn-2;
LysoPC 16:0;
C16: 0 lysophosphatidylcholine;
1-Hexadecanoyl-glycero-3-phosphocholine;
LPC C16:0;
LPC 16:0;
LysoPC (C16:0);
lysoPC16:0;
isotope of lysophosphatidylcholine C16:0;
lysoPC (16:0);
Lysophosphatidylcholine (16:0)

No. of studies

38

 

Relationship between LysoPC(16:0) and depression (count: 38)
Study Study Type Comparison groups Tissue Organism Up/Down regulated
Study M007 Type1 CRS group vs. control group Plasma Wistar rat Up
Study M029 Type1 CUMS group vs. control group Brain Sprague-Dawley rat Up
Study M029 Type2 CUMS + BHD group vs. CUMS group Brain Sprague-Dawley rat Down
Study M048 Type1 CVS group vs. control group Hippocampus Wistar rat Down
Study M048 Type1 CVS group vs. control group Serum Wistar rat Down
Study M048 Type2 CVS + fluoxetine group vs. CVS group Serum Wistar rat Up
Study M048 Type2 CVS + CSGS group vs. CVS group Hippocampus Wistar rat Up
Study M048 Type2 CVS + CSGS group vs. CVS group Serum Wistar rat Up
Study M048 Type2 CVS + fluoxetine group vs. CVS group Hippocampus Wistar rat Up
Study M061 Type1 depressed group vs. control group Plasma Human Up
Study M072 Type1 CUMS group vs. control group Plasma Sprague-Dawley rat Down
Study M072 Type2 CUMS + fluoxetine group vs. CUMS group Plasma Sprague-Dawley rat Up
Study M076 Type1 CUMS group vs. control group Hippocampus Sprague-Dawley rat Up
Study M076 Type2 CUMS + fluoxetine group vs. CUMS group Hippocampus Sprague-Dawley rat Down
Study M084 Type1 melancholic depressed group vs. control group Plasma Human Up
Study M095 Type1 CUMS group vs. control group Serum Sprague-Dawley rat Down
Study M096 Type1 CUMS group vs. control group Hippocampus Wistar rat Up
Study M096 Type2 CUMS + paroxetine group vs. CUMS group Hippocampus Wistar rat Down
Study M1072 Type1 CUMS group vs. control group Faece Cynomolgus monkey Down
Study M1086 Type1 CUMS group vs. control group Faece C57BL/6 mouse Up
Study M1117 Type1 MDD group vs. control group, Chinese cohort Plasma Human Up
Study M1117 Type1 MDD group vs. control group, Russian cohort Plasma Human Down
Study M120 Type1 CUMS group vs. control group Plasma Sprague-Dawley rat Down
Study M122 Type3 paroxetine group vs. control group Prefrontal cortex BALB/c mouse Up
Study M122 Type3 maprotiline group vs. control group Prefrontal cortex BALB/c mouse Up
Study M123 Type3 rTMS group vs. control group Striatum Wistar rat Down
Study M124 Type3 maprotiline group vs. control group Prefrontal cortex BALB/c mouse Up
Study M125 Type1 depressed group vs. control group Plasma Human Up
Study M457 Type1 CUMS group vs. control group Serum Sprague-Dawley rat Up
Study M532 Type1 MDD group vs. control group Plasma Human Up
Study M540 Type1 CUMS group vs. control group Hippocampus Sprague-Dawley rat Up
Study M541 Type1 CUMS group vs. control group Serum Sprague-Dawley rat Up
Study M582 Type2 CUMS + fluoxetine group vs. CUMS group Serum C57BL/6N mouse Down
Study M582 Type2 CUMS + fluoxetine group vs. CUMS group Faece C57BL/6N mouse Down
Study M582 Type3 control + fluoxetine group vs. control group Faece C57BL/6N mouse Down
Study M582 Type3 control + fluoxetine group vs. control group Hippocampus C57BL/6N mouse Up
Study M613 Type1 CSDS susceptible group vs. control group Nucleus accumbens C57BL/6 J mouse Down
Study M651 Type1 LPS group vs. control group Plasma C57BL/6 mouse Up
Study M651 Type2 LPS + fish oil group vs. LPS group Plasma C57BL/6 mouse Down
Study M676 Type1 CVS group vs. control group Hippocampus Wistar rat Up
Study M676 Type2 CVS + Chaihu-Shu-Gan-San group vs. CVS group Hippocampus Wistar rat Down
Study M681 Type1 CUMS group vs. control group Serum Sprague-Dawley rat Down
Study M681 Type2 CUMS + Chaihu Shu Gan San group vs. CUMS group Serum Sprague-Dawley rat Up
Study M690 Type2 CUMS + high dose of Zhi-zi-chi decoction group vs. CUMS group Serum Balb/c mouse Up
Study M744 Type1 CUS transplant group vs. control transplant group Hippocampus Sprague-Dawley rat Down
Study M774 Type1 MDD group vs. control group Serum Human Down
Study M789 Type1 CUMS group vs. control group Plasma Sprague-Dawley rat Up
Study M789 Type2 CUMS + fluoxetine group vs. CUMS group Plasma Sprague-Dawley rat Down
Study M789 Type2 CUMS + liquiritin group vs. CUMS group Plasma Sprague-Dawley rat Down
Study M815 Type1 CUMS group vs. control group Serum Sprague-Dawley rat Up
Study M815 Type2 CUMS + high dose of Radix Bupleuri–Radix Paeoniae Alba group vs. CUMS group Serum Sprague-Dawley rat Down
Study M815 Type2 CUMS + venlafaxine group vs. CUMS group Serum Sprague-Dawley rat Down
Study M826 Type1 CVS group vs. control group Colorectum Wistar rat Up
Study M835 Type1 CRS group vs. control group Faece C57BL/6 mouse Down
Study M835 Type1 CRS group vs. control group Faece C57BL/6 mouse Up
Study M880 Type1 depression group vs. control group Plasma Cynomolgus monkey Down
Study M890 Type1 CUMS group vs. control group Plasma Sprague-Dawley rat Up
Study M907 Type1 MDD group vs. control group Plasma Human Down
Study M948 Type1 CUMS group vs. control group Plasma Sprague-Dawley rat Up
Study M955 Type1 CUMS group vs. control group Hippocampus C57BL/6J mouse Down
Study M955 Type2 CUMS + deoiled sunflower seeds group vs. CUMS group Hippocampus C57BL/6J mouse Up
Study M955 Type2 CUMS + tryptophan-enriched whey protein-based group vs. CUMS group Hippocampus C57BL/6J mouse Up
Study M955 Type2 CUMS + deoiled and dechlorogenic acid-enriched sunflower seeds group vs. CUMS group Hippocampus C57BL/6J mouse Up