A comparison of 2H2O and phenylalanine flooding dose to investigate muscle protein synthesis with acute exercise in rats
A comparison of 2H2O and phenylalanine flooding dose to investigate muscle protein synthesis with acute exercise in rats
复制标题
DOI：
10.1152/ajpendo.90872.2008
复制
发表时间：
2009-07-01
影响因子：
5.1
通讯作者：
Fluckey, James D.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Gasier, Heath G.;Riechman, Steven E.;Fluckey, James D.
Gasier HG，Riechman SE，Wiggs MP，Previs SF，Fluckey JD.比较（H2O）-H-2和苯丙氨酸淹没剂量，研究急性运动大鼠肌肉蛋白质合成。Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 297：E252-E259，2009.首次发表于2009年4月14日; doi：10.1152/ajpendo.90872.2008。-本研究的主要目的是确定是否（H2O）-H-2和苯丙氨酸（Phe）的洪水剂量方法产生可比的蛋白质合成率（FSR）在骨骼肌后一个回合的高强度阻力运动（RE）。根据体重将Sprague-Dawley大鼠分为4小时对照组（CON 4 h; n = 6）、4小时抗阻运动组（RE 4 h; n = 6）、24小时对照组（CON 24 h; n = 6）或24小时抗阻运动组（RE 24 h; n = 6）。RE组被操作性地调节为进行一次高强度的“蹲式”RE。所有大鼠腹腔注射99.9%（HO）-H2-O-2，并在注射L-[2，3，4，5，6-H-3] Phe前24 h（n = 12）或4 h（n = 12）提供4.0%（HO）-H2饮用水。两种方法都没有检测到RE对混合腓肠肌、跖肌或比目鱼肌中FSR的影响。除了方法之间的定性相似性之外，当以每小时百分比表示时，4小时（H2O）-H-2 FSR测量值在所有肌肉中的定量大于24小时（H2O）-H-2和Phe淹没（P < 0.001），并且24小时（H2O）-H-2大于混合腓肠肌和跖肌中的Phe淹没剂量（P < 0.05）。相比之下，在24小时与4小时（H2O）-H-2和Phe淹没剂量组中，新合成的蛋白质的实际百分比显著更高（P < 0.001）。这些结果表明，当研究RE等扰动时，这些方法提供了“定性”相似的结果。然而，由于方法之间潜在的定量差异，实验问题应该决定应该使用什么方法。
Gasier HG, Riechman SE, Wiggs MP, Previs SF, Fluckey JD. A comparison of (H2O)-H-2 and phenylalanine flooding dose to investigate muscle protein synthesis with acute exercise in rats. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 297: E252-E259, 2009. First published April 14, 2009; doi:10.1152/ajpendo.90872.2008.-The primary objective of this investigation was to determine whether (H2O)-H-2 and phenylalanine (Phe) flooding dose methods yield comparable fractional rates of protein synthesis (FSR) in skeletal muscle following a single bout of high-intensity resistance exercise (RE). Sprague-Dawley rats were assigned by body mass to either 4-h control (CON 4 h; n = 6), 4-h resistance exercise (RE 4 h; n = 6), 24-h control (CON 24 h; n = 6), or 24-h resistance exercise (RE 24 h; n = 6). The RE groups were operantly conditioned to engage in a single bout of high-intensity, "squat-like" RE. All rats were given an intraperitoneal injection of 99.9% (HO)-H-2-O-2 and provided 4.0% (H2O)-H-2 drinking water for either 24 (n = 12) or 4 h (n = 12) prior to receiving a flooding dose of L-[2,3,4,5,6-H-3] Phe 16 h post-RE. Neither method detected an effect of RE on FSR in the mixed gastrocnemius, plantaris, or soleus muscle. Aside from the qualitative similarities between methods, the 4-h (H2O)-H-2 FSR measurements, when expressed in percent per hour, were quantitatively greater than the 24-h (H2O)-H-2 and Phe flooding in all muscles (P < 0.001), and the 24-h (H2O)-H-2 was greater than the Phe flooding dose in the mixed gastrocnemius and plantaris (P < 0.05). In contrast, the actual percentage of newly synthesized protein was significantly higher in the 24- vs. 4-h (H2O)-H-2 and Phe flooding dose groups (P < 0.001). These results suggest that the methodologies provide "qualitatively" similar results when a perturbation such as RE is studied. However, due to potential quantitative differences between methods, the experimental question should determine what approach should be used.