Search

While high-load resistance training increases muscle hypertrophy, the intramuscular protein responses to this form of training remains largely unknown. In the current study, recreationally resistance-trained college-aged males ( N = 15; mean ± SD: 23 ± 3 years old, 6 ± 5 years training) performed full-body, low-volume, high-load [68-90% of one repetition maximum (1RM)] resistance training over 10 weeks. Back squat strength testing, body composition testing, and a vastus lateralis biopsy were performed before (PRE) and 72 h after the 10-week training program (POST). Fiber type-specific cross-sectional area (fCSA), myofibrillar protein concentrations, sarcoplasmic protein concentrations, myosin heavy chain and actin protein abundances, and muscle tissue percent fluid were analyzed. The abundances of individual sarcoplasmic proteins in 10 of the 15 participants were also assessed using proteomics. Significant increases ( p < 0.05) in type II fCSA and back squat strength occurred with training, although whole-body fat-free mass paradoxically decreased ( p = 0.026). No changes in sarcoplasmic protein concentrations or muscle tissue percent fluid were observed. Myosin heavy chain protein abundance trended downward (-2.9 ± 5.8%, p = 0.069) and actin protein abundance decreased (-3.2 ± 5.3%, p = 0.034) with training. Proteomics indicated only 13 sarcoplasmic proteins were altered with training (12 up-regulated, 1 down-regulated, p < 0.05). Bioinformatics indicated no signaling pathways were affected, and proteins involved with metabolism (e.g., ATP-PCr, glycolysis, TCA cycle, or beta-oxidation) were not affected. These data comprehensively describe intramuscular protein adaptations that occur following 10 weeks of high-load resistance training. Although previous data from our laboratory suggests high-volume resistance training enhances the ATP-PCr and glycolytic pathways, we observed different changes in metabolism-related proteins in the current study with high-load training., (Copyright © 2020 Vann, Osburn, Mumford, Roberson, Fox, Sexton, Johnson, Johnson, Shake, Moore, Millevoi, Beck, Badisa, Mwashote, Ibeanusi, Singh and Roberts.)

The current study investigated how bovine milk extracellular vesicles (EVs) affected rotarod performance and biomarkers of skeletal muscle physiology in young, growing rats. Twenty-eight-day Fisher 344 rats were provided an AIN-93G-based diet for 4 weeks that either remained unadulterated [EVs and RNA-sufficient (ERS; n = 12)] or was sonicated [EVs and RNA-depleted (ERD; n = 12)]. Prior to (PRE) and on the last day of the intervention (POST), animals were tested for maximal rotarod performance. Following the feeding period, the gastrocnemius muscle was analyzed at the histological, biochemical, and molecular levels and was also used to measure mitochondrial function and reactive oxygen species (ROS) emission. A main effect of time was observed for rotarod time (PRE > POST, p = 0.001). Terminal gastrocnemius mass was unaffected by diet, although gastrocnemius muscle fiber cross sectional area was 11% greater ( p = 0.018) and total RNA (a surrogate of ribosome density) was 24% greater ( p = 0.001) in ERD. Transcriptomic analysis of the gastrocnemius indicated that 22 mRNAs were significantly greater in ERS versus ERD ( p < 0.01), whereas 55 mRNAs were greater in ERD versus ERS ( p < 0.01). There were no differences in gastrocnemius citrate synthase activity or mitochondrial coupling (respiratory control ratio), although mitochondrial ROS production was lower in ERD gastrocnemius ( p = 0.016), which may be explained by an increase in glutathione peroxidase protein levels ( p = 0.020) in ERD gastrocnemius. Dietary EVs profiling confirmed that sonication in the ERD diet reduced EVs content by ∼60%. Our findings demonstrate that bovine milk EVs depletion through sonication elicits anabolic and transcriptomic effects in the gastrocnemius muscle of rapidly maturing rats. While this did not translate into a functional outcome between diets (i.e., rotarod performance), longer feeding periods may be needed to observe such functional effects.

Limited evidence exists regarding differentially expressed biomarkers between previously-trained low versus high hypertrophic responders in response to resistance training. Herein, 30 college-aged males (training age 5 ± 3 years; mean ± SD) partook in 6 weeks of high-volume resistance training. Body composition, right leg vastus lateralis (VL) biopsies, and blood were obtained prior to training (PRE) and at the 3-week (W3) and 6-week time points (W6). The 10 lowest (LOW) and 10 highest (HIGH) hypertrophic responders were clustered based upon a composite hypertrophy score of PRE-to-W6 changes in right leg VL mean muscle fiber cross-sectional area (fCSA), VL thickness assessed via ultrasound, upper right leg lean soft tissue mass assessed via dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), and mid-thigh circumference. Two-way ANOVAs were used to compare biomarker differences between the LOW and HIGH clusters over time, and stepwise linear regression was performed to elucidate biomarkers that explained significant variation in the composite hypertrophy score from PRE to W3, W3 to W6, and PRE to W6 in all 30 participants. PRE-to-W6 HIGH and LOW responders exhibited a composite hypertrophy change of +10.7 ± 3.2 and -2.1 ± 1.6%, respectively ( p < 0.001). Compared to HIGH responders, LOW responders exhibited greater PRE type II fCSA (+18%, p = 0.022). Time effects ( p < 0.05) existed for total RNA/mg muscle (W6 > W3 > PRE), phospho (p)-4EBP1 (PRE > W3&W6), pan-mTOR (PRE > W3 < W6), p-mTOR (PRE > W3 < W6), pan-AMPKα (PRE > W3 < W6), pan-p70s6k (PRE > W3), muscle ubiquitin-labeled proteins (PRE > W6), mechano growth factor mRNA (W6 > W3&PRE), 45S rRNA (PRE > W6), and muscle citrate synthase activity (PRE > W3&W6). No interactions existed for the aforementioned biomarkers and/or other assayed targets (muscle 20S proteasome activity, serum total testosterone, muscle androgen receptor protein levels, muscle glycogen, or serum creatine kinase). Regression analysis indicated PRE type II fiber percentage ( R 2 = 0.152, β = 0.390, p = 0.033) and PRE type II fCSA ( R 2 = 0.207, β = -0.455, p = 0.019) best predicted the PRE-to-W6 change in the composite hypertrophy score. While our sample size is limited, these data suggest: (a) HIGH responders may exhibit more growth potential given that they possessed lower PRE type II fCSA values and (b) possessing a greater type II fiber percentage as a trained individual may be advantageous for hypertrophy in response to resistance training.

Numerous reports suggest there are low and high skeletal muscle hypertrophic responders following weeks to months of structured resistance exercise training (referred to as low and high responders herein). Specifically, divergent alterations in muscle fiber cross sectional area (fCSA), vastus lateralis thickness, and whole body lean tissue mass have been shown to occur in high versus low responders. Differential responses in ribosome biogenesis and subsequent protein synthetic rates during training seemingly explain some of this individual variation in humans, and mechanistic in vitro and rodent studies provide further evidence that ribosome biogenesis is critical for muscle hypertrophy. High responders may experience a greater increase in satellite cell proliferation during training versus low responders. This phenomenon could serve to maintain an adequate myonuclear domain size or assist in extracellular remodeling to support myofiber growth. High responders may also express a muscle microRNA profile during training that enhances insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) mRNA expression, although more studies are needed to better validate this mechanism. Higher intramuscular androgen receptor protein content has been reported in high versus low responders following training, and this mechanism may enhance the hypertrophic effects of testosterone during training. While high responders likely possess "good genetics," such evidence has been confined to single gene candidates which typically share marginal variance with hypertrophic outcomes following training (e.g., different myostatin and IGF-1 alleles). Limited evidence also suggests pre-training muscle fiber type composition and self-reported dietary habits (e.g., calorie and protein intake) do not differ between high versus low responders. Only a handful of studies have examined muscle biomarkers that are differentially expressed between low versus high responders. Thus, other molecular and physiological variables which could potentially affect the skeletal muscle hypertrophic response to resistance exercise training are also discussed including rDNA copy number, extracellular matrix and connective tissue properties, the inflammatory response to training, and mitochondrial as well as vascular characteristics.