↓ Skip to main content

The effects of acute leucine or leucine–glutamine co-ingestion on recovery from eccentrically biased exercise

Overview of attention for article published in Amino Acids, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
19 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
video
2 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 Mendeley
Title
The effects of acute leucine or leucine–glutamine co-ingestion on recovery from eccentrically biased exercise
Published in
Amino Acids, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00726-018-2565-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark Waldron, Cameron Ralph, Owen Jeffries, Jamie Tallent, Nicola Theis, Stephen David Patterson

Abstract

This study investigated the effects of leucine or leucine + glutamine supplementation on recovery from eccentric exercise. In a double-blind independent groups design, 23 men were randomly assigned to a leucine (0.087 g/kg; n = 8), leucine + glutamine (0.087 g/kg + glutamine 0.3 g/kg; n = 8) or placebo (0.3 g/kg maltodextrin; n = 7) group. Participants performed 5 sets of drop jumps, with each set comprising 20 repetitions. Isometric knee-extensor strength, counter-movement jump (CMJ) height, delayed-onset muscle soreness (DOMS) and creatine kinase (CK) were measured at baseline, 1, 24, 48 h and 72 h post-exercise. There was a time × group interaction for isometric strength, CMJ and CK (P < 0.05), with differences between the leucine + glutamine and placebo group at 48 h and 72 h for strength (P = 0.013; d = 1.43 and P < 0.001; d = 2.06), CMJ (P = 0.008; d = 0.87 and P = 0.019; d = 1.17) and CK at 24 h (P = 0.012; d = 0.54) and 48 h (P = 0.010; d = 1.37). The leucine group produced higher strength at 72 h compared to placebo (P = 0.007; d = 1.65) and lower CK at 24 h (P = 0.039; d = 0.63) and 48 h (P = 0.022; d = 1.03). Oral leucine or leucine + glutamine increased the rate of recovery compared to placebo after eccentric exercise. These findings highlight potential benefits of co-ingesting these amino acids to ameliorate recovery.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 87 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 21%
Student > Master 8 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 5 6%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 31 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 28 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 34 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 April 2022.
All research outputs
#2,741,949
of 23,500,709 outputs
Outputs from Amino Acids
#147
of 1,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,647
of 328,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Amino Acids
#4
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,500,709 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,879 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.