Influence of aerobic exercise intensity on myofibrillar and mitochondrial protein synthesis in young men during early and late postexercise recovery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aerobic exercise is typically associated with expansion of the mitochondrial protein pool and improvements in muscle oxidative capacity. The impact of aerobic exercise intensity on the synthesis of specific skeletal muscle protein subfractions is not known. We aimed to study the effect of aerobic exercise intensity on rates of myofibrillar (MyoPS) and mitochondrial (MitoPS) protein synthesis over an early (0.5-4.5 h) and late (24-28 h) period during postexercise recovery. Using a within-subject crossover design, eight males (21 ± 1 yr, Vo2peak 46.7 ± 2.0 ml·kg(-1)·min(-1)) performed two work-matched cycle ergometry exercise trials (LOW: 60 min at 30% Wmax; HIGH: 30 min at 60% Wmax) in the fasted state while undergoing a primed constant infusion of l-[ring-(13)C6]phenylalanine. Muscle biopsies were obtained at rest and 0.5, 4.5, 24, and 28 h postexercise to determine both the "early" and "late" response of MyoPS and MitoPS and the phosphorylation status of selected proteins within both the Akt/mTOR and MAPK pathways. Over 24-28 h postexercise, MitoPS was significantly greater after the HIGH vs. LOW exercise trial (P < 0.05). Rates of MyoPS were increased equivalently over 0.5-4.5 h postexercise recovery (P < 0.05) but remained elevated at 24-28 h postexercise only following the HIGH trial. In conclusion, an acute bout of high- but not low-intensity aerobic exercise in the fasted state resulted in a sustained elevation of both MitoPS and MyoPS at 24-28 h postexercise recovery.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".