Oral taurine supplementation does not increase muscle taurine content or alter substrate metabolism during prolonged submaximal cycling in active males
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was designed to determine if 7 days (d) of oral taurine supplementation would increase muscle taurine content at rest, and alter substrate metabolism during 2 hr of cycling at 60% of VO 2 max. Eight active males (mean ± SD, 22±1yr, 181.3±2.4cm, 80.9±10.6kg) cycled for 2 hr after 7 d of placebo (PL) ingestion (6g glucose/d) and again following 7 d of taurine (T) ingestion (6g/d). Skeletal muscle biopsies obtained from the vastus lateralis immediately prior to and following exercise revealed no effect of T supplementation on muscle taurine content (mmol/kg dry muscle) at rest (PL, 43.8±15.2 vs. T, 41.7±14.6) or after exercise (PL, 42.6±11.7 vs. T, 43.3±10.8). No difference was observed between conditions in pre and post‐exercise muscle glycogen or muscle metabolite contents (lactate, PCr, Cr, ATP, ADP f , AMP f , acetyl CoA and acetylcarnitine). Substrate use assessed by respiratory exchange was unaffected by T supplementation (total carbohydrate oxidation (g/hr); PL, 102±45 vs. T, 97±45, and fat oxidation; Pl, 24±12 vs. T, 23±10). Blood lactate and glucose responses to exercise were not different between conditions. Additional plasma and muscle amino acid concentrations were also unaffected by taurine ingestion. These data indicate that dietary taurine supplementation does not alter skeletal muscle taurine content at rest and has no effect on substrate metabolism during prolonged submaximal cycling.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".