4.0 Article

Astaxanthin supplementation enhances metabolic adaptation with aerobic training in the elderly

期刊

PHYSIOLOGICAL REPORTS
卷 9, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.14814/phy2.14887

关键词

aging; anti-oxidants; astaxanthin; fat oxidation; sex difference; training adaptation

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health grants [T32 AG000057, P01 AG001751]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that combining the natural antioxidant and anti-inflammatory dietary supplement astaxanthin (AX) with endurance training can improve specific muscle endurance and fat oxidation in elderly individuals, with a more significant effect observed in males.
Endurance training (ET) is recommended for the elderly to improve metabolic health and aerobic capacity. However, ET-induced adaptations may be suboptimal due to oxidative stress and exaggerated inflammatory response to ET. The natural antioxidant and anti-inflammatory dietary supplement astaxanthin (AX) has been found to increase endurance performance among young athletes, but limited investigations have focused on the elderly. We tested a formulation of AX in combination with ET in healthy older adults (65-82 years) to determine if AX improves metabolic adaptations with ET, and if AX effects are sex-dependent. Forty-two subjects were randomized to either placebo (PL) or AX during 3 months of ET. Specific muscle endurance was measured in ankle dorsiflexors. Whole body exercise endurance and fat oxidation (FATox) was assessed with a graded exercise test (GXT) in conjunction with indirect calorimetry. Results: ET led to improved specific muscle endurance only in the AX group (Pre 353 +/- 26 vs. Post 472 +/- 41 contractions), and submaximal GXT duration improved in both groups (PL 40.8 +/- 9.1% and AX 41.1 +/- 6.3%). The increase in FATox at lower intensity after ET was greater in AX (PL 0.23 +/- 0.15 g vs. AX 0.76 +/- 0.18 g) and was associated with reduced carbohydrate oxidation and increased exercise efficiency in males but not in females.

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

4.0
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