MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Effects of Acute and Chronic Beetroot Juice Supplementation on Exercise Economy and Time Trial Performance in Recreationally Active Females

2018· article· en· W2892101132 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kate A. Wickham, Devin G. McCarthy, Daniel T. Cervone, Lex B. Verdijk, Luc J. C. van Loon, Lawrence L. Spriet

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmacology and Obesity Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCrossover studyMorningHeart rateNitriteBlood pressurePhysiologyInternal medicinePlaceboNitrateChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Beetroot juice (BRJ) is a nutritional supplement that has received widespread attention over the last decade. Dietary nitrate (NO 3 − ) reduces the oxygen cost of submaximal exercise and improves performance in recreationally active males both acutely and chronically. The ergogenic effects of BRJ have been attributed to its high nitrate content. However, the evidence supporting the effects of BRJ in females is lacking. Purpose To investigate the effects of acute and chronic BRJ supplementation on submaximal exercise oxygen uptake (VO 2 ) and time trial performance (~30 min) in recreationally active females. Methods Using a double‐blind, randomized, crossover design, 12 recreationally active females who were taking oral contraceptives supplemented acutely (2.5 hr) and chronically (8 days) with 280 mL BRJ/day (~26 mmoles NO 3 − ) or the same volume of a nitrate‐free BRJ (PLA). All trials were conducted at the same time in the morning, and there was a 9 ± 0.7 day washout period between trials. Subjects arrived to the laboratory, a baseline blood sample was drawn, a standardized breakfast including 140 mL BRJ or PLA was provided, and a second blood sample was drawn 2 hr later. Blood samples were analyzed for plasma NO 3 − and nitrite (NO 2 − ), as well as estrogen and progesterone. The subjects then cycled for 10 min at 50% and 10 min at 70% VO 2peak , and completed a 4 kJ/kg body mass time trial (TT). Ratings of perceived exertion (RPE), heart rate (HR) and revolutions per minute (rpm) were recorded at 5 min intervals during the submaximal cycling protocol. RPE, HR, rpm, and power output (PO) were recorded as the subjects completed each 20% of the TT. Results There were no significant differences in estrogen or progesterone levels between trials. Plasma NO 3 − concentrations increased significantly following BRJ supplementation compared to PLA (Acute PLA: 44 ± 3 and Chronic PLA, 41 ± 3 μM vs. Acute BRJ, 761 ± 31 and Chronic BRJ, 1091 ± 58 μM). Similarly, plasma NO 2 − increased significantly following BRJ supplementation compared to PLA (Acute PLA, 265 ± 25 and Chronic PLA, 278 ± 26 nM vs. Acute BRJ, 753 ± 84 and Chronic BRJ, 729 ± 101 nM). There was no significant difference in mean VO 2 at 50% VO 2peak (Acute PLA, 1254 ± 45: Acute BRJ, 1259 ± 46: Chronic PLA, 1267 ± 45: Chronic BRJ, 1252 ± 42 mL/min O 2 ) and 70% VO 2peak (Acute PLA, 1804 ± 60: Acute BRJ, 1791 ± 53: Chronic PLA, 1814 ± 54: Chronic BRJ, 1789 ± 54 mL/min O 2 ) between trials. No significant difference was found for rpm, HR, or RPE at 50% or 70% VO 2peak . TT performance was unaffected by BRJ (Acute PLA, 1709 ± 75: Acute BRJ, 1813 ± 97: Chronic PLA, 1751 ± 78: Chronic BRJ, 1791 ± 102 s). No significant difference was found for HR, RPE, or PO between conditions throughout the time trial. Conclusion BRJ did not reduce submaximal exercise oxygen uptake or improve aerobic TT performance in recreationally active females. Future studies should investigate the potential sex differences that may exist with respect to the ergogenic effects of BRJ supplementation. Support or Funding Information Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicPharmacology and Obesity TreatmentFrench-language works237,207