MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132993639

The Impact of Essential Amino Acid Supplementation on Free-living Protein Metabolism and Recovery following Resistance Exercise in Healthy Adults

2022· dissertation· W7132993639 on OpenAlexaff
Marcus Waskiw-Ford

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2022
Typedissertation
Language
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle metabolism and nutrition
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMyofibrilAnabolismLeucineContext (archaeology)Protein turnoverAmino acidProtein metabolismProtein catabolismProtein biosynthesis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The consumption of essential amino acids (EAAs) plays an important role in enhancing adaptation and recovery after exercise. The two studies of this thesis sought to determine the effect of crystalline EAA supplementation following resistance exercise (RE) on protein metabolism and muscle recovery in free-living settings. The first study examined the effect of daily EAA supplementation on myofibrillar protein synthesis following RE and how this may relate to the recovery of muscle damage. We found that EAA supplementation did not enhance myofibrillar protein synthesis integrated over 96 hours post-RE in free-living young men consuming 1.2g/kg/day of dietary protein. We also found that EAA supplementation moderately improved muscle damage recovery over the same timeframe, but this was unrelated to changes in myofibrillar protein synthesis. The second study examined the retention of exogenous leucine (an index of whole-body protein synthesis) and the urinary 3-methylhistidine:creatinine ratio (3MH:Cr; an index of myofibrillar protein breakdown) with different EAA supplements following bodyweight RE in a home-based setting. We found that exogenous leucine retention and urinary 3MH:Cr improved with the consumption of an EAA formulation or branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs) following RE in young adults. However, these outcomes generally improved to a greater extent with EAA supplementation as compared to BCAAs. The overall findings of this thesis indicate that the consumption of all EAAs optimizes the anabolic response to RE, but is less impactful in the context of adequate dietary protein. Additionally, the ability of EAAs to ameliorate muscle damage recovery is not contingent on increases in myofibrillar protein synthesis, suggesting they primarily enhance recovery via a different mechanism. Finally, we demonstrate that a home-based study design to assess postprandial protein metabolism, which had not previously been conducted, is feasible and provides meaningful results. This approach should be further applied in various settings outside the laboratory to understand how the beneficial effects of exercise are best supported by nutrition in different populations and/or circumstances.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicMuscle metabolism and nutrition→French-language works237,207→