Cited by 48Muscle metabolism and nutritionSports Performance and TrainingMuscle Physiology and Disorders

Does habitual dietary intake influence myofiber hypertrophy in response to resistance training? A cluster analysis

Open access
Thalacker-Mercer, Anna E., Petrella, John K., Bamman, Marcas M.·2009·Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism

Abstract

Although resistance exercise training (RT) is a common intervention to stimulate muscle protein synthesis and increase skeletal muscle mass, the optimal daily protein and total energy intakes sufficient to support RT-mediated muscle growth are as yet unclear. Further, the efficacy of RT varies widely among adults of all ages and whether this is attributable to interindividual differences in nutrition is not known. To determine if self-selected daily intake of macronutrients and specific components of dietary protein and fat are predictive of the magnitude of RT-mediated muscle growth, detailed 4-day dietary records were analyzed on 60 subjects previously clustered (K-means cluster analysis) as non-, modest, and extreme responders (non, n = 16; mod, n = 29; xtr, n = 15), based on the magnitudes of change in vastus lateralis myofiber cross-sectional area following a 16-week, 3-day-per-week, high-intensity RT. Despite the marked contrast between 60% myofiber hypertrophy in xtr and zero growth in non, we found no differences among response clusters in daily intakes of energy (mean ± SEM: non 102 ± 8; mod 111 ± 6; xtr 109 ± 5 kJ·kg–1·day–1), protein (non 0.97 ± 0.08; mod 1.07 ± 0.07; xtr 1.05 ± 0.06 g·kg–1·day–1), carbohydrate (non 3.02 ± 0.24; mod 3.18 ± 0.20; xtr 3.14 ± 0.17 g·kg–1·day–1), and fat (non 0.95 ± 0.09; mod 1.05 ± 0.08; xtr 1.03 ± 0.08 g·kg–1·day–1), which generally met or exceeded dietary recommendations. There were no cluster differences in intakes of branched chain amino acids known to stimulate muscle protein synthesis. Using the novel K-means clustering approach, we conclude from this preliminary study that protein and energy intakes were sufficient to facilitate modest and extreme muscle growth during RT and intrinsic or extrinsic factors other than nutrient ingestion apparently impaired the anabolic response in nonresponders.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1139/h09-038

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [29]Kim JS Petrella JK Cross JM Bamman MM Load-mediated down-regulation fo myostatin mRNA is not sufficient to promote myofiber hypertrophy in humans: a cluster analysis J Appl Physiol Epub 02 August, 2007b 17673556

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Thalacker-Mercer, A. E., Petrella, J. K., & Bamman, M. M.
Affiliations
  • UAB Departments of Physiology and Biophysics and Nutrition Sciences, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA.
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
Venue
Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism
Published
2009-08
Volume
34
Issue
4
Pages
632-639
ISSN
  • 1715-5312 (ISSN-L)
  • 1715-5320
OpenAlex
W2062602635
Cited by
48
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 5
FWCI
1.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
  • Rural Development Administration
  • National Institute on Aging (L30 AG032915, R01AG017896)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (T32DK062710, P30DK056336)
  • National Center for Research Resources (M01RR000032)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Muscle metabolism and nutrition
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Muscle Physiology and Disorders
Keywords
resistance training, muscle fiber hypertrophy, protein intake, energy intake, macronutrient intake, muscle growth, training response variability, vastus lateralis, branched-chain amino acids, muscle protein synthesis, dietary records, individual differences
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Energy Intake, Dietary Carbohydrates, Dietary Fats, Dietary Proteins, Feeding Behavior, Female, Humans, Hypertrophy, Male, Middle Aged, Muscle Proteins, Pilot Projects, Time Factors, Diet Records, Cluster Analysis, Muscle Fibers, Skeletal, Quadriceps Muscle, Resistance Training, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review