Potato Protein Isolate Stimulates Muscle Protein Synthesis at Rest and with Resistance Exercise in Young Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Skeletal muscle myofibrillar protein synthesis (MPS) increases in response to protein feeding and to resistance exercise (RE), where each stimuli acts synergistically when combined. The efficacy of plant proteins such as potato protein (PP) isolate to stimulate MPS is unknown. We aimed to determine the effects of PP ingestion on daily MPS with and without RE in healthy women. In a single blind, parallel-group design, 24 young women (21 ± 3 years, n = 12/group) consumed a weight-maintaining baseline diet containing 0.8 g/kg/d of protein before being randomized to consume either 25 g of PP twice daily (1.6 g/kg/d total protein) or a control diet (CON) (0.8 g/kg/d total protein) for 2 wks. Unilateral RE (~30% of maximal strength to failure) was performed thrice weekly with the opposite limb serving as a non-exercised control (Rest). MPS was measured by deuterated water ingestion at baseline, following supplementation (Rest), and following supplementation + RE (Exercise). Ingestion of PP stimulated MPS by 0.14 ± 0.09 %/d at Rest, and by 0.32 ± 0.14 %/d in the Exercise limb. MPS was significantly elevated by 0.20 ± 0.11 %/d in the Exercise limb in CON (p = 0.008). Consuming PP to increase protein intake to levels twice the recommended dietary allowance for protein augmented rates of MPS. Performance of RE stimulated MPS regardless of protein intake. PP is a high-quality, plant-based protein supplement that augments MPS at rest and following RE in healthy young women.
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) | 0.001 | 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".