4.6 Article

Impact of protein coingestion on muscle protein synthesis during continuous endurance type exercise

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/ajpendo.00446.2010

关键词

carbohydrate; protein metabolism; skeletal muscle; AMP-activated protein kinase; mammalian target of rapamycin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the impact of protein coingestion with carbohydrate on muscle protein synthesis during endurance type exercise. Twelve healthy male cyclists were studied during 2 h of fasted rest followed by 2 h of continuous cycling at 55% W-max. During exercise, subjects received either 1.0 g.kg(-1).h-(1) carbohydrate (CHO) or 0.8 g.kg(-1).h(-1) carbohydrate with 0.2 g.kg(-1).h(-1) protein hydrolysate (CHO+PRO). Continuous intravenous infusions with L-[ring-C-13(6)] phenylalanine and L-[ring-H-2(2)] tyrosine were applied, and blood and muscle biopsies were collected to assess whole body protein turnover and muscle protein synthesis rates at rest and during exercise conditions. Protein coingestion stimulated whole body protein synthesis and oxidation rates during exercise by 22 +/- 3 and 70 +/- 17%, respectively (P < 0.01). Whole body protein breakdown rates did not differ between experiments. As a consequence, whole body net protein balance was slightly negative in CHO and positive in the CHO+PRO treatment (-4.9 +/- 0.3 vs. 8.0 +/- 0.3 mu mol Phe.kg(-1).h(-1), respectively, P < 0.01). Mixed muscle protein fractional synthetic rates (FSR) were higher during exercise compared with resting conditions (0.058 +/- 0.006 vs. 0.035 +/- 0.006%/h in CHO and 0.070 +/- 0.011 vs. 0.038 +/- 0.005%/h in the CHO+PRO treatment, respectively, P < 0.05). FSR during exercise did not differ between experiments (P = 0.46). We conclude that muscle protein synthesis is stimulated during continuous endurance type exercise activities when carbohydrate with or without protein is ingested. Protein coingestion does not further increase muscle protein synthesis rates during continuous endurance type exercise.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据