Search

We examined how set-volume equated resistance training using either the back squat (SQ) or hip thrust (HT) affected hypertrophy and various strength outcomes. Untrained college-aged participants were randomized into HT (n = 18) or SQ (n = 16) groups. Surface electromyograms (sEMG) from the right gluteus maximus and medius muscles were obtained during the first training session. Participants completed 9 weeks of supervised training (15–17 sessions), before and after which gluteus and leg muscle cross-sectional area (mCSA) was assessed via magnetic resonance imaging. Strength was also assessed prior to and after the training intervention via three-repetition maximum (3RM) testing and an isometric wall push test. Gluteus mCSA increases were similar across both groups. Specifically, estimates [(−) favors HT (+) favors SQ] modestly favored the HT versus SQ for lower [effect ±SE, −1.6 ± 2.1 cm2; CI95% (−6.1, 2.0)], mid [−0.5 ± 1.7 cm2; CI95% (−4.0, 2.6)], and upper [−0.5 ± 2.6 cm2; CI95% (−5.8, 4.1)] gluteal mCSAs but with appreciable variance. Gluteus medius + minimus [−1.8 ± 1.5 cm2; CI95% (−4.6, 1.4)] and hamstrings [0.1 ± 0.6 cm2; CI95% (−0.9, 1.4)] mCSA demonstrated little to no growth with small differences between groups. mCSA changes were greater in SQ for the quadriceps [3.6 ± 1.5 cm2; CI95% (0.7, 6.4)] and adductors [2.5 ± 0.7 cm2; CI95% (1.2, 3.9)]. Squat 3RM increases favored SQ [14 ± 2 kg; CI95% (9, 18),] and hip thrust 3RM favored HT [−26 ± 5 kg; CI95% (−34, −16)]. 3RM deadlift [0 ± 2 kg; CI95% (−4, 3)] and wall push strength [−7 ± 12N; CI95% (−32, 17)] similarly improved. All measured gluteal sites showed greater mean sEMG amplitudes during the first bout hip thrust versus squat set, but this did not consistently predict gluteal hypertrophy outcomes. Squat and hip thrust training elicited similar gluteal hypertrophy, greater thigh hypertrophy in SQ, strength increases that favored exercise allocation, and similar deadlift and wall push strength increases.

Although several reports have hypothesized that exercise may increase skeletal muscle protein lactylation, empirical evidence in humans is lacking. Thus, we adopted a multi-faceted approach to examine if acute and subchronic resistance training (RT) altered skeletal muscle protein lactylation levels. In mice, we also sought to examine if surgical ablation-induced plantaris hypertrophy coincided with increases in muscle protein lactylation. To examine acute responses, participants’ blood lactate concentrations were assessed before, during, and after eight sets of an exhaustive lower body RT bout (n = 10 trained college-aged men). Vastus lateralis biopsies were also taken before, 3-h post, and 6-h post-exercise to assess muscle protein lactylation. To identify training responses, another cohort of trained college-aged men (n = 14) partook in 6 weeks of lower-body RT (3x/week) and biopsies were obtained before and following the intervention. Five-month-old C57BL/6 mice were subjected to 10 days of plantaris overload (OV, n = 8) or served as age-matched sham surgery controls (Sham, n = 8). Although acute resistance training significantly increased blood lactate responses ∼7.2-fold (p < 0.001), cytoplasmic and nuclear protein lactylation levels were not significantly altered at the post-exercise time points, and no putative lactylation-dependent mRNA was altered following exercise. Six weeks of RT did not alter cytoplasmic protein lactylation (p = 0.800) despite significantly increasing VL muscle size (+3.5%, p = 0.037), and again, no putative lactylation-dependent mRNA was significantly affected by training. Plantaris muscles were larger in OV versus Sham mice (+43.7%, p < 0.001). However, cytoplasmic protein lactylation was similar between groups (p = 0.369), and nuclear protein lactylation was significantly lower in OV versus Sham mice (p < 0.001). The current null findings, along with other recent null findings in the literature, challenge the thesis that lactate has an appreciable role in promoting skeletal muscle hypertrophy.