Hui Ying Luk1, William J Kraemer2, Tunde K Szivak3, Shawn D Flanagan3, David R Hooper3, Brian R Kupchak4, Brett A Comstock5, Courtenay Dunn-Lewis6, Jakob L Vingren1, William H DuPont3, Wesley C Hymer7. 1. Department of Kinesiology, Health Promotion and Recreation, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA. 2. Department of Human Sciences, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA. Electronic address: kraemer.44@osu.edu. 3. Department of Human Sciences, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA. 4. Human Performance Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA. 5. Division of Kinesiology and Sport Science, University of South Dakota, Vermillion, SD, USA. 6. Department of Health Sciences, School of Science and Engineering, Merrimack College, North Andover, MA, USA. 7. Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We sought to determine if an acute heavy resistance exercise test (AHRET) would elicit sex-specific responses in circulating growth hormone (GH), with untreated serum and serum treated with a reducing agent to break disulfide-bindings between GH dimers. METHODS: 19 untrained participants (nine men and ten women) participated in an acute heavy resistance exercise test using the back squat. Blood samples were drawn before exercise (Pre), immediate post (IP), +15 min (+15), and +30 min (+30) afterwards. Serum samples were chemically reduced using glutathione (GSH). ELISAs were then used to compare immunoreactive GH concentrations in reduced (+GSH) and non-reduced (-GSH) samples. Data were analyzed using a three-way (2 sex × 2 treatment × 4 time) mixed methods ANOVA, with significance set at p ≤ 0.05. RESULTS: GSH reduction resulted in increased immunoreactive GH concentrations when compared to non-reduced samples at Pre (1.68 ± 0.33 μg/L vs 1.25 ± 0.25 μg/L), IP (7.69 ± 1.08 μg/L vs 5.76 ± 0.80 μg/L), +15 min (4.39 ± 0.58 μg/L vs 3.24 ± 0.43 μg/L), and +30 min (2.35 ± 0.49 μg/L vs 1.45 ± 0.23 μg/L). Also, women demonstrated greater GH responses compared to men, and this was not affected by reduction. CONCLUSIONS: Heavy resistance exercise increases immunoreactive GH dimer concentrations in men and women, with larger increases in women and more sustained response in men. The physiological significance of a sexually dimorphic GH response adds to the growing literature on aggregate GH and may be explained by differences in sex hormones and the structure of the GH cell network.
PURPOSE: We sought to determine if an acute heavy resistance exercise test (AHRET) would elicit sex-specific responses in circulating growth hormone (GH), with untreated serum and serum treated with a reducing agent to break disulfide-bindings between GH dimers. METHODS: 19 untrained participants (nine men and ten women) participated in an acute heavy resistance exercise test using the back squat. Blood samples were drawn before exercise (Pre), immediate post (IP), +15 min (+15), and +30 min (+30) afterwards. Serum samples were chemically reduced using glutathione (GSH). ELISAs were then used to compare immunoreactive GH concentrations in reduced (+GSH) and non-reduced (-GSH) samples. Data were analyzed using a three-way (2 sex × 2 treatment × 4 time) mixed methods ANOVA, with significance set at p ≤ 0.05. RESULTS:GSH reduction resulted in increased immunoreactive GH concentrations when compared to non-reduced samples at Pre (1.68 ± 0.33 μg/L vs 1.25 ± 0.25 μg/L), IP (7.69 ± 1.08 μg/L vs 5.76 ± 0.80 μg/L), +15 min (4.39 ± 0.58 μg/L vs 3.24 ± 0.43 μg/L), and +30 min (2.35 ± 0.49 μg/L vs 1.45 ± 0.23 μg/L). Also, women demonstrated greater GH responses compared to men, and this was not affected by reduction. CONCLUSIONS: Heavy resistance exercise increases immunoreactive GH dimer concentrations in men and women, with larger increases in women and more sustained response in men. The physiological significance of a sexually dimorphic GH response adds to the growing literature on aggregate GH and may be explained by differences in sex hormones and the structure of the GH cell network.
Authors: Joseph R Pierce; Brian J Martin; Kevin R Rarick; Joseph A Alemany; Jeffery S Staab; William J Kraemer; Wesley C Hymer; Bradley C Nindl Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2020-08-21 Impact factor: 5.555