Novel Essential Amino Acid Supplements Following Resistance Exercise Induce Aminoacidemia and Enhance Anabolic Signaling Irrespective of Age: A Proof-of-Concept Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the effects of ingesting a leucine-enriched essential amino acid (EAA) gel alone or combined with resistance exercise (RE) versus RE alone (control) on plasma aminoacidemia and intramyocellular anabolic signaling in healthy younger (28 ± 4 years) and older (71 ± 3 years) adults. Blood samples were obtained throughout the three trials, while muscle biopsies were collected in the postabsorptive state and 2 h following RE, following the consumption of two 50 mL EAA gels (40% leucine, 15 g total EAA), and following RE with EAA (combination (COM)). Protein content and the phosphorylation status of key anabolic signaling proteins were determined via immunoblotting. Irrespective of age, during EAA and COM peak leucinemia (younger: 454 ± 32 µM and 537 ± 111 µM; older: 417 ± 99 µM and 553 ± 136 µM) occurred ~60-120 min post-ingestion (younger: 66 ± 6 min and 120 ± 60 min; older: 90 ± 13 min and 78 ± 12 min). In the pooled sample, the area under the curve for plasma leucine and the sum of branched-chain amino acids was significantly greater in EAA and COM compared with RE. For intramyocellular signaling, significant main effects were found for condition (mTOR (Ser2481), rpS6 (Ser235/236)) and age (S6K1 (Thr421/Ser424), 4E-BP1 (Thr37/46)) in age group analyses. The phosphorylation of rpS6 was of similar magnitude (~8-fold) in pooled and age group data 2 h following COM. Our findings suggest that a gel-based, leucine-enriched EAA supplement is associated with aminoacidemia and a muscle anabolic signaling response, thus representing an effective means of stimulating muscle protein anabolism in younger and older adults following EAA and COM.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".