4.4 Article

Effect of training and detraining on the expression of heat shock proteins in m. triceps brachii of untrained males and females

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY
Volume 98, Issue 3, Pages 310-322

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00421-006-0281-y

Keywords

HSP72; HSP27; GRP75; intensity; volume; duration; untrained muscle

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Forty untrained persons were randomized to four different training protocols that exercised the m. triceps brachii. Group 1 and 2 performed high intensity (HI) elbow extensions and group 3 and 4 performed low intensity (LI) elbow extensions. Group 1 and 3 trained until they had accumulated a matching high volume (HV) of training, while group 2 and 4 trained until they had accumulated a matching low volume (LV) of training. Training for 5-8 weeks increased the HSP72, HSP27 and GRP75 levels in the subjects' m. triceps brachii by 111, 71 and 192%, respectively (Fig. 1a-c). There were, however, no significant differences in the heat shock protein (HSP) responses to training between the four training groups (Fig. 2a-c). The frequency of extreme responses to exercise was, however, higher after HI exercise than after LI exercise, indicating that HI exercise induces extreme HSP reactions in some subjects. When we assigned the subjects to three clusters, according to the total number of repetitions they had lifted, the subjects who had lifted the highest number of repetitions had lower PostExc HSP levels compared with subjects that lifted the lowest number of repetitions (Fig. 3a-c). Additionally, there was a negative non-linear regression (Fig. 4a-c) between the subjects PreExc levels of HSP72, HSP27 and GRP75 and the percentage change in their respective protein concentration after training (r = -0.75, -0.89 and -0.88, all P < 0.0001). Thus, the PreExc level of HSPs seems to be an important regulator of HSP expression following the training.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available