However, numerous investigations typically involving highly trained endurance MI-503 cost athletes running or cycling after periods of significant fasting have provided evidence supporting enhanced performance and mood or lowered perceived exertion during exercise lasting ~1 h with CE ingestion or mouth PHA-848125 clinical trial rinse, without confirmation of the mechanisms responsible for these changes. The aims of this study were to determine if similar ergogenic properties would be exhibited in non-fasted recreational exercisers. The results of this study support our first hypothesis that CE consumption during 50 min of sub-maximal exercise would not result

in improved WAnT performance compared to NCE or W (Figure 1). Ball et al. [5] found carbohydrate ingestion during 50 min of high intensity cycling resulted in 6.5% higher mean power and 5.8% higher peak power during a subsequent WAnT versus ingesting an artificially-sweetened placebo. The similarity in protocols makes comparing the results between the current and Ball et al. [5] studies favorable with 3 factors taken into consideration. The first is that the 50 min sub-maximal

exercise intensity was prescribed at a more moderate intensity level that could be completed by our highly active but non-competitive level recreational exercisers. It is possible that our contrasting finding of no impact of carbohydrate consumption on performance was due to the lower relative intensity level of the sub-maximal exercise portion CHIR-99021 supplier of our protocol, which resulted in 15 beats per min lower mean HR than was exhibited for the participants in the Ball et al. [5] study. However, Loperamide mean sub-maximal exercise RPEs in the Ball et al. [5] study were only 5.0 ± 1.0 (carbohydrate trial) and 5.6 ± 1.1(placebo trial), and our participants reported the overall difficulty of the trials was higher than their normal workouts (Table 3). A second difference in our methodology and

that of Ball et al. [5] was that our protocol incorporated 3 sets of WAnT versus a single WAnT to assess performance. The primary rationale for incorporating WAnT as a performance measure was that variability in pacing strategies for our recreational exercisers would make it difficult to interpret more aerobically-based time trial tests that have been most commonly used to assess performance differences in the past. However, repeated WAnT have been established to be a stable measure, particularly if a practice session is provided [33] and allowed for direct comparison to the results of the Ball et al. [5] study. The additional two WAnT were used to ensure fatigue late in exercise, as we anticipated our sub-maximal exercise bout would be comparatively less intense based on average heart rate than that of Ball et al. [5].