4.6 Article

Effect of prolonged, submaximal exercise and carbohydrate ingestion on monocyte intracellular cytokine production in humans

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-LONDON
卷 528, 期 3, 页码 647-655

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7793.2000.t01-1-00647.x

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

1. The present study was undertaken to examine the effect of exercise and carbohydrate (CHO) ingestion on intracellular monocyte cytokine production. Subjects performed 2 h of cycling at 70% peak pulmonary O-2 uptake ((V) over dot (O2,peak)) while ingesting either an 8% CHO beverage or a sweet placebo. Whole blood was incubated with (stimulated) or without (spontaneous) lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and surface stained for monocyte surface antigens. The cells were permeabilised, stained for intracellular cytokines and analysed using flow cytometry. 2. Exercise had no effect on the number of monocytes spontaneously producing cytokines, but the number of stimulated IL-1 alpha-, TNF-alpha- and IL-6-positive monocytes were elevated (P < 0.01) immediately post-exercise and 2 h post-exercise. These stimulated cells produced less (P < 0.05) TNF-alpha immediately post-exercise, and less (P < 0.05) TNF- and IL-1 alpha 2 h post-exercise. There was a small, but significant increase (P < 0.05) in the plasma IL-6 concentration immediately post-exercise. 3. Exercise resulted in an elevation (P < 0.01) in the plasma adrenaline concentration in the placebo trial, and ingestion of CHO attenuated this increase. CHO ingestion had no effect on monocyte cytokine production, plasma IL-B or circulating leukocyte numbers. 4. These data suggest that circulating monocytes are not the origin of increased levels of plasma IL-6 during exercise: prolonged cycling exercise increased the number of monocytes producing cytokines upon stimulation, but these cells produced less cytokines post-exercise. In addition, attenuation of plasma adrenaline levels had no effect on plasma IL-6 or monocyte cytokine production.

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