Nikolaidis Michalis G, Margaritelis Nikos V, Paschalis Vassilis, Theodorou Anastasios A, Kyparos Antonios, Vrabas Ioannis S
Redox biology has been one of the most rapidly developed fields of biology and one of the most popular in the mass media. Free radicals (reactive species in the present review) have been linked to many different biological processes, such as cell signalling (Forman et al. 2010), enzyme activity (Stubbe and Van Der Donk 1998), synthesis of antibiotic substances (Lesniak et al. 2005) and pathophysiology of diseases (Valko et al. 2007). From the results of thorough investigations conducted in the past three decades, it is now clear that acute exercise induces oxidative stress, whereas chronic exercise enhances the endogenous antioxidant mechanisms (Camiletti-Moirón et al. 2013; Theodorou et al. 2011). Along with the progress of the exercise redox biology, the molecular and biochemical properties of many nutrient compounds possessing redox properties (i.e. pro-oxidants and mostly antioxidants) have also been revealed. However, despite the long-standing research efforts, it is still uncertain whether and how the exogenous administered antioxidants affect redox homeostasis and physical performance (Bell et al. 2013; Braakhuis 2012; Nikolaidis 2012c; Peternelj and Coombes 2011; Powers et al. 2010). Why did it prove to be difficult to reveal the effects of antioxidant supplementation on oxidative stress and human physiology? We believe that the main reason is the methodological uniqueness of each study, particularly regarding the research strategy that investigators adopt on issues relevant to redox biology. Taking into account that redox biology of exercise is a relatively new field, research is driven more on intuition and less on sound methodological evidence. Thus, it is desirable to develop and achieve some agreement on key influencing factors, which investigators should take into account when designing studies in the area of redox biology. Therefore, the aim of this chapter is to provide a methodological framework and broad directions on setting up appropriate experimental set-ups. In particular, we have introduced and tentatively answered eight questions, which a researcher may come across when designing experiments in the redox biology of exercise. It is emphasised, particularly considering the inherent complexity of redox biochemistry, that the following answers are based on the current knowledge; therefore, they can always be amended or disproved by new evidence and should not be accepted as the final answers.
氧化还原生物学一直是生物学领域中发展最为迅速的领域之一,也是大众媒体中最热门的领域之一。自由基(在本综述中为活性物质)与许多不同的生物学过程相关联,如细胞信号传导(福尔曼等人,2010年)、酶活性(斯塔布和范德唐克,1998年)、抗生素物质的合成(莱斯尼亚克等人,2005年)以及疾病的病理生理学(瓦尔科等人,2007年)。从过去三十年进行的深入研究结果来看,现在很清楚,急性运动诱导氧化应激,而慢性运动增强内源性抗氧化机制(卡米莱蒂 - 莫伊龙等人,2013年;西奥多鲁等人,2011年)。随着运动氧化还原生物学的进展,许多具有氧化还原特性的营养化合物(即促氧化剂和主要是抗氧化剂)的分子和生化特性也已被揭示。然而,尽管进行了长期的研究努力,但外源性给予的抗氧化剂是否以及如何影响氧化还原稳态和身体性能仍不确定(贝尔等人,2013年;布拉赫伊斯,2012年;尼科莱迪斯,2012c;彼得内尔吉和库姆斯,2011年;鲍尔斯等人,2010年)。为什么证明难以揭示补充抗氧化剂对氧化应激和人体生理学的影响呢?我们认为主要原因是每项研究的方法独特性,特别是关于研究人员在与氧化还原生物学相关问题上采用的研究策略。考虑到运动氧化还原生物学是一个相对较新的领域,研究更多地是由直觉驱动,而较少基于可靠的方法学证据。因此,期望在关键影响因素方面达成一些共识并加以发展,研究人员在设计氧化还原生物学领域的研究时应考虑这些因素。因此,本章的目的是提供一个方法框架和关于建立适当实验设置的广泛方向。特别是,我们介绍并初步回答了八个问题,研究人员在设计运动氧化还原生物学实验时可能会遇到这些问题。需要强调的是,尤其考虑到氧化还原生物化学固有的复杂性,以下答案是基于当前知识;因此,它们总是可以被新证据修正或反驳,不应被视为最终答案。