Reduced resting skeletal muscle protein synthesis is rescued by resistance exercise and protein ingestion following short-term energy deficit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The myofibrillar protein synthesis (MPS) response to resistance exercise (REX) and protein ingestion during energy deficit (ED) is unknown. In young men (n = 8) and women (n = 7), we determined protein signaling and resting postabsorptive MPS during energy balance [EB; 45 kcal·kg fat-free mass (FFM)(-1)·day(-1)] and after 5 days of ED (30 kcal·kg FFM(-1)·day(-1)) as well as MPS while in ED after acute REX in the fasted state and with the ingestion of whey protein (15 and 30 g). Postabsorptive rates of MPS were 27% lower in ED than EB (P < 0.001), but REX stimulated MPS to rates equal to EB. Ingestion of 15 and 30 g of protein after REX in ED increased MPS ~16 and ~34% above resting EB (P < 0.02). p70 S6K Thr(389) phosphorylation increased above EB only with combined exercise and protein intake (~2-7 fold, P < 0.05). In conclusion, short-term ED reduces postabsorptive MPS; however, a bout of REX in ED restores MPS to values observed at rest in EB. The ingestion of protein after REX further increases MPS above resting EB in a dose-dependent manner. We conclude that combining REX with increased protein availability after exercise enhances rates of skeletal muscle protein synthesis during short-term ED and could in the long term preserve muscle mass.
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".