| Literature DB >> 24500111 |
Vitor de Salles Painelli1, Bryan Saunders, Craig Sale, Roger Charles Harris, Marina Yázigi Solis, Hamilton Roschel, Bruno Gualano, Guilherme Giannini Artioli, Antonio Herbert Lancha.
Abstract
Recent investigations have suggested that highly trained athletes may be less responsive to the ergogenic effects of β-alanine (BA) supplementation than recreationally active individuals due to their elevated muscle buffering capacity. We investigated whether training status influences the effect of BA on repeated Wingate performance. Forty young males were divided into two groups according to their training status (trained: T, and non-trained: NT cyclists) and were randomly allocated to BA and a dextrose-based placebo (PL) groups, providing four experimental conditions: NTPL, NTBA, TPL, TBA. BA (6.4 g day(-1)) or PL was ingested for 4 weeks, with participants completing four 30-s lower-body Wingate bouts, separated by 3 min, before and after supplementation. Total work done was significantly increased following supplementation in both NTBA (p = 0.03) and TBA (p = 0.002), and it was significantly reduced in NTPL (p = 0.03) with no difference for TPL (p = 0.73). BA supplementation increased mean power output (MPO) in bout 4 for the NTBA group (p = 0.0004) and in bouts 1, 2 and 4 for the TBA group (p ≤ 0.05). No differences were observed in MPO for NTPL and TPL. BA supplementation was effective at improving repeated high-intensity cycling performance in both trained and non-trained individuals, highlighting the efficacy of BA as an ergogenic aid for high-intensity exercise regardless of the training status of the individual.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24500111 PMCID: PMC3984416 DOI: 10.1007/s00726-014-1678-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Amino Acids ISSN: 0939-4451 Impact factor: 3.520
Participant characteristics
| NTPL ( | NTBA ( | TPL ( | TBA ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 26 ± 4 | 25 ± 4 | 33 ± 12 | 32 ± 8 |
| Body mass (kg) | 72.6 ± 8.8 | 77.6 ± 9.9 | 68.9 ± 10.0 | 71.7 ± 5.5 |
| Height (m) | 1.75 ± 0.08 | 1.80 ± 0.07 | 1.79 ± 0.07 | 1.82 ± 0.05 |
| Weekly training volume (km) | – | – | 230 ± 165 | 278 ± 94 |
| Training experience (years) | – | – | 9 ± 6 | 8 ± 8 |
NTPL non-trained + PL, NTBA non-trained + BA, TPL trained + PL, TBA trained + BA. No differences were observed between groups
Performance in the four bouts of the Wingate test according to training status
| Non-trained ( | Trained ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| TWD (J) | 49,093 ± 6,043 | 54,399 ± 6,603 | 0.013 |
| Performance decrement (%)a | 32.66 ± 7.38 | 11.93 ± 6.39 | <0.0001 |
| Relative peak power output | |||
| 1st bout (W/kg) | 8.18 ± 0.70 | 8.16 ± 0.77 | 0.940 |
| 2nd bout (W/kg) | 7.73 ± 0.59 | 8.03 ± 0.80 | 0.196 |
| 3rd bout (W/kg) | 6.89 ± 0.71 | 7.79 ± 0.69 | <0.0001 |
| 4th bout (W/kg) | 5.99 ± 0.87 | 7.50 ± 0.66 | <0.0001 |
| Relative mean power output | |||
| 1st bout (W/kg) | 6.67 ± 0.46 | 6.86 ± 0.51 | 0.238 |
| 2nd bout (W/kg) | 5.74 ± 0.42 | 6.54 ± 0.52 | <0.0001 |
| 3rd bout (W/kg) | 4.93 ± 0.52 | 6.29 ± 0.50 | <0.0001 |
| 4th bout (W/kg) | 4.48 ± 0.53 | 6.04 ± 0.51 | <0.0001 |
aDecrement in work done from the 1st bout to the 4th bout
Energy, macronutrient and β-alanine intake
| NTPL ( | NTBA ( | TPL ( | TBA ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Energy (Kcal) | 2,747 ± 661 | 3,364 ± 662 | 3,181 ± 430 | 2,511 ± 769 |
| Carbohydrate (g) | 342 ± 96 | 448 ± 86 | 364 ± 50 | 304 ± 64 |
| Protein (g) | 134 ± 37 | 150 ± 39 | 140 ± 42 | 111 ± 39 |
| Fat (g) | 94 ± 35 | 108 ± 47 | 129 ± 23 | 95 ± 52 |
| β-Alanine (mg) | 383 ± 191 | 397 ± 192 | 446 ± 328 | 364 ± 283 |
Fig. 1a Absolute change in performance in placebo (PL) and β-alanine (BA) with trained and non-trained participants grouped together. *p ≤ 0.001 from placebo. b Absolute change in performance for individual groups NTPL, TPL, NTBA and TBA. # p = 0.008 from NTPL. $ p = 0.037 from TPL. Effect sizes: NTPL—0.2; TPL—0.03; NTBA—0.2; TBA—0.4
Fig. 2a Individual response in TWD to supplementation in the β-alanine groups (NTBA and TBA, respectively). b Individual response in TWD to supplementation in the placebo groups (NTPL and TPL, respectively). Individuals who improved performance are indicated by a solid line, while those who did not are indicated by a dotted line
Fig. 3MPO during each bout of the Wingate test for NTPL (a), NTBA (b), TPL (c), and TBA (d). Pre- and post-supplementation MPO are indicated by white and black bars, respectively. *p ≤ 0.05 from the previous bout. # p ≤ 0.05 from pre-supplementation during the same bout