<scp>l</scp>-glutamine and <scp>l</scp>-alanine supplementation increase glutamine-glutathione axis and muscle HSP-27 in rats trained using a progressive high-intensity resistance exercise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study we investigated the chronic effects of oral l-glutamine and l-alanine supplementation, either in their free or dipeptide form, on glutamine-glutathione (GLN-GSH) axis and cytoprotection mediated by HSP-27 in rats submitted to resistance exercise (RE). Forty Wistar rats were distributed into 5 groups: sedentary; trained (CTRL); and trained supplemented with l-alanyl-l-glutamine, l-glutamine and l-alanine in their free form (GLN+ALA), or free l-alanine (ALA). All trained animals were submitted to a 6-week ladder-climbing protocol. Supplementations were offered in a 4% drinking water solution for 21 days prior to euthanasia. Plasma glutamine, creatine kinase (CK), myoglobin (MYO), and erythrocyte concentration of reduced GSH and glutathione disulfide (GSSG) were measured. In tibialis anterior skeletal muscle, GLN-GSH axis, thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS), and the expression of heat shock factor 1 (HSF-1), 27-kDa heat shock protein (HSP-27), and glutamine synthetase were determined. In CRTL animals, high-intensity RE reduced muscle glutamine levels and increased GSSG/GSH rate and TBARS, as well as augmented plasma CK and MYO levels. Conversely, l-glutamine-supplemented animals showed an increase in plasma and muscle levels of glutamine, with a reduction in GSSG/GSH rate, TBARS, and CK. Free l-alanine administration increased plasma glutamine concentration and lowered muscle TBARS. HSF-1 and HSP-27 were high in all supplemented groups when compared with CTRL (p < 0.05). The results presented herein demonstrate that l-glutamine supplemented with l-alanine, in both a free or dipeptide form, improve the GLN-GSH axis and promote cytoprotective effects in rats submitted to high-intensity RE training.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".