4.7 Review

Influence of Amino Acids, Dietary Protein, and Physical Activity on Muscle Mass Development in Humans

期刊

NUTRIENTS
卷 5, 期 3, 页码 852-876

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu5030852

关键词

Protein; amino acids; muscle protein synthesis; muscle protein breakdown; resistance exercise

资金

  1. Arla Foods Ingredients Group P/S
  2. Danish Dairy Research Foundation
  3. Danish Rheumatism Association

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ingestion of protein is crucial for maintenance of a variety of body functions and within the scope of this review we will specifically focus on the regulation of skeletal muscle mass. A quantitative limitation exists as to how much muscle protein the body can synthesize in response to protein intake. Ingestion of excess protein exerts an unwanted load to the body and therefore, it is important to find the least amount of protein that provides the maximal hypertrophic stimulus. Hence, research has focused on revealing the relationship between protein intake (dose) and its resulting stimulation of muscle protein synthesis (response). In addition to the protein amount, the protein digestibility and, hence, the availability of its constituent amino acids is decisive for the response. In this regard, recent studies have provided in-depth knowledge about the time-course of the muscle protein synthetic response dependent on the characteristics of the protein ingested. The effect of protein intake on muscle protein accretion can further be stimulated by prior exercise training. In the ageing population, physical training may counteract the development of. anabolic resistance. and restore the beneficial effect of protein feeding. Presently, our knowledge is based on measures obtained in standardized experimental settings or during long-term intervention periods. However, to improve coherence between these types of data and to further improve our knowledge of the effects of protein ingestion, other investigative approaches than those presently used are requested.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据