Moro Tatiana, Monaco Lucia, Naro Fabio, Reggiani Carlo, Paoli Antonio
Department of Biomedical Sciences, Nutrition and Exercise Physiology Laboratory, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Sapienza University, Roma, Italy ; and.
J Strength Cond Res. 2024 Oct 1;38(10):1695-1703. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000004209. Epub 2022 Jan 5.
Moro, T, Monaco, L, Naro, F, Reggiani, C, and Paoli, A. Exercise intensity and rest intervals effects on intracellular signals and anabolic response of skeletal muscle to resistance training. J Strength Cond Res 38(10): 1695-1703, 2024-Resistance training (RT) is one of the most important stimuli for muscle hypertrophy, and it may play also an important role on weight loss and fatty acids oxidation. Clearly, RT affects anabolic pathways, but the differences among various training techniques has been poorly investigated. We sought to compare the effect of 2 different intensities of training: high-intensity interval resistance training (HIIRT) and traditional resistance training (TRT), on muscle signaling pathway. Nine young healthy subjects performed HIIRT and TRT protocol on 2 different occasions and with different legs on leg extension. High-intensity interval resistance training technique consisted of 3 sets of 6 repetitions (reps) at 6 repetition maximum and then 20 seconds of rest and 2 or 3 repetitions (until exhaustion) repeated for 3 times with 2'30″ rest between sets, whereas TRT consisted of 3 sets of 15 reps with 75 seconds of rest between sets. Biopsies from the vastus lateralis were taken at baseline (pre), immediately (0 hours) at the end of training, and 6 hours (6 h) and 24 hours (24 h) after training. Western blot and real-time polymerase chain reaction messenger RNA (mRNA) analysis were performed to assess muscle signaling pathway activation. In both protocols, rpS6 phosphorylation significantly increased at 6 hours (p < 0.05). Traditional resistance training showed a significant increase at 24 hours of AMPK phosphorylation compared with HIIRT (p < 0.05), whereas no significant differences between groups were found for other proteins. mRNA analysis showed no differences between protocols except for striated muscle activator of Rho signaling. The manipulation of resistance training intensity through incomplete/short recovery does not induce different molecular anabolic and metabolic responses compared with a TRT method.Trial Registration number: NCT04163120 retrospectively registered.
莫罗、T、莫纳科、L、纳罗、F、雷贾尼、C和保利、A。运动强度和休息间隔对骨骼肌细胞内信号及合成代谢反应的影响：阻力训练研究。《力量与体能研究杂志》38(10): 1695 - 1703，2024年 - 阻力训练（RT）是肌肉肥大最重要的刺激因素之一，它在减肥和脂肪酸氧化方面也可能发挥重要作用。显然，RT会影响合成代谢途径，但不同训练技术之间的差异尚未得到充分研究。我们试图比较两种不同强度训练：高强度间歇阻力训练（HIIRT）和传统阻力训练（TRT）对肌肉信号通路的影响。9名年轻健康受试者在两个不同场合，用不同的腿进行腿伸展动作，分别完成HIIRT和TRT方案。高强度间歇阻力训练技术包括3组，每组6次重复（6RM），然后休息20秒，再进行2或3次重复（直至力竭），重复3次，组间休息2分30秒，而TRT包括3组，每组15次重复，组间休息75秒。在基线（训练前）、训练结束时即刻（0小时）、训练后6小时（6小时）和24小时（24小时）采集股外侧肌活检样本。进行蛋白质免疫印迹和实时聚合酶链反应信使核糖核酸（mRNA）分析，以评估肌肉信号通路的激活情况。在两种方案中，rpS6磷酸化在6小时时均显著增加（p < 0.05）。与HIIRT相比，传统阻力训练在24小时时AMPK磷酸化显著增加（p < 0.05），而其他蛋白质在两组之间未发现显著差异。mRNA分析显示，除了横纹肌Rho信号激活剂外，两种方案之间没有差异。与传统阻力训练方法相比，通过不完全/短暂恢复来控制阻力训练强度不会诱导不同的分子合成代谢和代谢反应。试验注册号：NCT04163120（回顾性注册）
