Immobilization induces anabolic resistance in human myofibrillar protein synthesis with low and high dose amino acid infusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We tested the hypothesis that increasing blood amino acid (AA) availability would counter the physical inactivity-induced reduction in muscle protein synthesis. We determined how 14 days of unilateral knee immobilization affected quadriceps myofibrillar protein synthesis (MPS) in young healthy subjects (10 men, 2 women, 21 +/- 1 years; 80.2 +/- 4.0 kg, mean +/- S.E.M.) in the post-absorptive state and after infusing AA (10% Primene) at low or high doses (43 and 261 mg kg(-1) h(-1)). Muscle cross-sectional area (MRI) and peak isometric torque declined in the immobilized leg (-5.0 +/- 1.2% and -25 +/- 3%, respectively, both P < 0.005), but were unchanged (all P > 0.6) in the non-immobilized leg. Immobilization induced a 27% decline in the rate of post-absorptive MPS (immobilized, 0.027 +/- 0.003: non-immobilized, 0.037 +/- 0.003% h(-1); P < 0.001). Regardless of dose, AA infusion stimulated a greater rise in MPS in the non-immobilized legs; at 4 h MPS was greater by +54 +/- 12% with low dose and +68 +/- 17% with high dose AA infusion (both P < 0.001). There was some evidence of delayed responsiveness of phosphorylation of Akt to high doses of AA and p70S6k at both doses but no marked differences in that of mTOR, GSK3beta or eEF2. Phosphorylation of focal adhesion kinase (Tyr(576/577)) was reduced (P < 0.05) with immobilization. We observed no change in polyubiquitinated protein content after immobilization. We confirm that 14 days of immobilization reduces MPS in the post-absorptive state and this diminution is reduced but not abolished by increased provision of AA, even at high rates. The immobilization-induced decline in post-absorptive MPS with the 'anabolic resistance' to amino acids can account for much of immobilization-induced muscle atrophy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".