Macronutrient intake and whole body protein metabolism following resistance exercise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: The provision of carbohydrate (CHO) supplements following resistance exercise attenuated muscle protein (PRO) degradation (Roy et al. J. Appl. Physiol. 82:1882-1888, 1997). The addition of PRO may have a synergistic effect upon whole body protein balance by increasing synthesis (Biolo et al. Am. J. Physiol. 273:E122-E129, 1997). PURPOSE: To determine if the macronutrient composition of a postexercise beverage would alter muscle anabolism and/or catabolism following resistance exercise. METHODS: We provided isoenergetic CHO (1 g x kg(-1)) and CHO/PRO/FAT supplements and placebo (PL) immediately (t = 0 h) and 1 h (t = + 1 h) following resistance exercise (9 exercises/3 sets/80% 1 RM) to 10 young, healthy, resistance-trained males. Whole body leucine turnover was determined from L-[1-13C]leucine kinetics at approximately 4 h postexercise. RESULTS: No differences were observed for urinary 3-methylhistidine or urea nitrogen excretion between the trials. Leucine flux was significantly elevated at approximately 4 h postexercise for both CHO/PRO/FAT (177.59+/-12.68 micromol x kg(-1) x h(-1)) and CHO (156.18+/-7.77 micromol x kg(-1) x h(-1)) versus PL (126.32+/-10.51 micromol x kg(-1) x h(-1)) (P < 0.01). Whole body leucine oxidation was elevated at approximately 4 h for CHO/PRO/FAT (29.50+/-3.34 micromol x kg(-1) h(-1)) versus CHO (16.32+/-2.33 micromol x kg(-1) x h(-1)) (P < 0.01) and PL (21.29+/-2.54 micromol x kg(-1) x h(-1)) (P < 0.05). Nonoxidative leucine disposal (NOLD) was significantly elevated at approximately 4 h for both CHO/PRO/FAT (148.09+/-10.37 micromol x kg(-1) x h(-1)) and CHO (139.86+/-7.02 micromol x kg(-1) x h(-1)) versus PL (105.03+/-8.97 micromol x kg(-1) x h(-1)) (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that consumption of either CHO or CHO/PRO/FAT immediately and 1 h following a resistance training bout increased NOLD as compared with a placebo.
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) | 0.002 | 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".