4.6 Article

Changes in signalling pathways regulating protein synthesis in human muscle in the recovery period after endurance exercise

期刊

ACTA PHYSIOLOGICA
卷 191, 期 1, 页码 67-75

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-1716.2007.01712.x

关键词

GSK-3; mTOR; p70S6 kinase; translation initiation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim: Exercise induced alterations in the rate of muscle protein synthesis may be related to activity changes in signalling pathways involved in protein synthesis. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether such changes in enzyme phosphorylation occur after endurance exercise. Methods: Six male subjects performed ergometer cycling exercise for 1 h at 75% of the maximal oxygen uptake. Muscle biopsy samples from the vastus lateralis were taken before, immediately after, 30 min, 1 h, 2 h and 3 h after exercise for the determination of protein kinase B (PKB/Akt), mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), glycogen synthase 3 kinase (GSK-3), p70S6 kinase (p70(S6k)) and eukaryotic elongation factor 2 (eEF2) phosphorylation. Results: The phosphorylation of Akt was unchanged directly after exercise, but two- to fourfold increased 1 and 2 h after the exercise, whereas GSK-3 alpha and beta phosphorylation were two- to fourfold elevated throughout most of the 3-h recovery period. Phosphorylation of mTOR was elevated threefold directly after, 30 min and 2 h after exercise and eEF2 phosphorylation was decreased by 35-75% from 30 min to 3 h-recovery. Exercise led to a five- to eightfold increase in Ser(424)/Thr(421) phosphorylation of p70(S6k) up to 30 min after exercise, but no change in Thr(389) phosphorylation. Conclusions: The marked decrease in eEF2 phosphorylation suggests an activation of translation elongation and possibly protein synthesis in the recovery period after sustained endurance exercise. The lack of p70(S6k) activation suggests that translation initiation is activated via alternative pathways, possibly via the activation of eukaryotic initiating factor 2B.

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

4.6
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