4.3 Article

Influence of prior exercise on muscle [phosphorylcreatine] and deoxygenation kinetics during high-intensity exercise in men

期刊

EXPERIMENTAL PHYSIOLOGY
卷 93, 期 4, 页码 468-478

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1113/expphysiol.2007.041897

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

(31)Phosphate-magnetic resonance spectroscopy and near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) were used for the simultaneous assessment of changes in quadriceps muscle metabolism and oxygenation during consecutive bouts of high-intensity exercise. Six male subjects completed two 6 min bouts of single-legged knee-extension exercise at 80% of the peak work rate separated by 6 min of rest while positioned inside the bore of a 1.5 T superconducting magnet. The total haemoglobin and oxyhaemoglobin concentrations in the area of the quadriceps muscle interrogated with NIRS were significantly higher in the baseline period prior to the second compared with the first exercise bout, consistent with an enhanced muscle oxygenation. Intramuscular phosphorylcreatine concentration ([PCr]) dynamics were not different over the fundamental region of the response (time constant for bout 1, 51 +/- 15 s versus bout 2, 52 +/- 17 s). However, the [PCr] dynamics over the entire response were faster in the second bout (mean response time for bout 1, 72 +/- 16 s versus bout 2, 57 +/- 8 s; P < 0.05), as a consequence of a greater fall in [PCr] in the fundamental phase and a reduction in the magnitude of the 'slow component' in [PCr] beyond 3 min of exercise (bout 1, 10 +/- 6% versus bout 2, 5 +/- 3%; P < 0.05). These data suggest that the increased muscle O-2 availability afforded by the performance of a prior bout of high-intensity exercise does not significantly alter the kinetics of [PCr] hydrolysis at the onset of a subsequent bout of high-intensity exercise. The greater fall in [PCr] over the fundamental phase of the response following prior high-intensity exercise indicates that residual fatigue acutely reduces muscle efficiency.

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

4.3
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