AJP - Regu Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 256: R886-R891, 1989;
0363-6119/89 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Richard, D.
Right arrow Articles by Deshaies, Y.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Richard, D.
Right arrow Articles by Deshaies, Y.

AJP - Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology, Vol 256, Issue 4 886-R891, Copyright © 1989 by American Physiological Society


ARTICLES

Effects of exercise-rest cycles on energy balance in rats

D. Richard, P. Lachance and Y. Deshaies
Department de Physiologie, Faculte de Medecine, Universite Laval, Quebec City, Canada.

The present study investigated the nutritional energetics of rats exercised either intermittently or continually. Male rats were divided into three groups: a sedentary group, an intermittently trained group, and a continually trained group. Continually trained rats were exercised every day for a period of 8 wk. Over the same period, intermittently trained rats were exercised for 4 wk, each week being followed by a week of rest. Rats were trained on a rodent treadmill at a moderate intensity. Carcasses were analyzed for energy, fat, and protein contents. Brown adipose tissue (BAT) thermogenesis was assessed by measuring mitochondrial guanosine 5'-diphosphate binding. Energy intake was lower in both intermittently and continually trained rats than in sedentary animals. The weight, fat, and protein gains were, in continually trained rats, significantly lower than in sedentary animals. Similarly, intermittently trained rats had lower gains than sedentary animals, although the difference between the two groups was not as marked as the difference between sedentary and continually trained animals. Energy expenditure, which represents the difference between energy intake and energy gain, was less than sedentary controls in both intermittently and continually trained rats. The low expenditure in trained groups did not, however, relate to changes in facultative BAT thermogenesis.A low energy expenditure on components such as basal metabolic rate and obligatory diet-induced thermogenesis would most likely account for the difference in expenditure between sedentary and trained rats.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online