Acute effect of exercise intensity and duration on acylated ghrelin and hunger in men.
Journal of Endocrinology
Reason for embargo
Acute exercise transiently suppresses the orexigenic gut hormone acylated ghrelin, but the extent exercise intensity and duration determine this response is not fully understood. The effects of manipulating exercise intensity and duration on acylated ghrelin concentrations and hunger were examined in two experiments. In experiment one, nine healthy males completed three, 4-hour conditions (control, moderate-intensity running (MOD) and vigorous-intensity running (VIG)), with an energy expenditure of ~2.5 MJ induced in both MOD (55 min running at 52% peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak)) and VIG (36 min running at 75% VO2peak). In experiment two, nine healthy males completed three, 9-hour conditions (control, 45 min running (EX45) and 90 min running (EX90)). Exercise was performed at 70% VO2peak In both experiments, participants consumed standardised meals, and acylated ghrelin concentrations and hunger were quantified at predetermined intervals. In experiment one, delta acylated ghrelin concentrations were lower than control in MOD (ES=0.44, P=0.01) and VIG (ES=0.98, P<0.001); VIG was lower than MOD (ES=0.54, P=0.003). Hunger ratings were similar across the conditions (P=0.35). In experiment two, delta acylated ghrelin concentrations were lower than control in EX45 (ES=0.77, P<0.001) and EX90 (ES=0.68, P<0.001); EX45 and EX90 were similar (ES=0.09, P=0.55). Hunger ratings were lower than control in EX45 (ES=0.20, P=0.01) and EX90 (ES=0.27, P=0.001); EX45 and EX90 were similar (ES=0.07, P=0.34). Hunger and delta acylated ghrelin concentrations remained suppressed at 1.5h in EX90 but not EX45. In conclusion, exercise intensity, and to a lesser extent duration, are determinants of the acylated ghrelin response to acute exercise.
The research was supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Diet, Lifestyle & Physical Activity Biomedical Research Unit based at University Hospitals of Leicester and Loughborough University. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health.
This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from BioScientifica via the DOI in this record.
Published online December 20, 2016
Place of publication