Background—exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD) and internal exercise load are increased after competing in ultraendurance events such as mountain marathons. Adequate carbohydrate (CHO) intake during exercise optimizes athletic performance and could limit EIMD, reduce internal exercise load and, thus, improve recovery. Therefore, the aim of this study was to research into and compare the effects of high CHO intake (120 g/h) in terms of CHO intake recommendation (90 g/h) and regular CHO intake performed by ultraendurance athletes (60 g/h) during a mountain marathon, on exercise load and EIMD markers (creatine kinase (CK), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase (GOT), urea and creatinine). Materials and Methods—a randomized trial was carried out on 20 male elite runners who had previously undertaken nutritional and gut training, and who consumed different CHO dosages according to experimental (EXP—120 g/h), control (CON—90 g/h) and low CHO intake (LOW—60 g/h) groups during a ~4000 m cumulative slope mountain marathon. EIMD markers were analyzed before the race and 24 h afterwards. Internal exercise load was calculated based on rate of perceived exertion (RPE) during and after the marathon event. Results—internal exercise load during the mountain marathon was significantly lower (p = 0.019; η2p = 0.471) in EXP (3805 ± 281 AU) compared to LOW (4688 ± 705 AU) and CON (4692 ± 716 AU). Moreover, results revealed that the EXP group evidenced significantly lower CK (p = 0.019; η2p = 0.373), LDH (p < 0.001; η2p = 0.615) and GOT (p = 0.003; η2p = 0.500) values 24 h after the mountain marathon race compared to LOW and CON. Along these lines, EIMD and exercise load evidenced a close correlation (R = 0.742; p < 0.001). Conclusion: High CHO intake (120 g/h) during a mountain marathon could limit the EIMD observed by CK, LDH and GOT and internal exercise load compared to CHO ingestion of 60 and 90 g/h.

Background: Current carbohydrate (CHO) intake recommendations for ultra-trail activities lasting more than 2.5 h is 90 g/h. However, the benefits of ingesting 120 g/h during a mountain marathon in terms of post-exercise muscle damage have been recently demonstrated. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyze and compare the effects of 120 g/h CHO intake with the recommendations (90 g/h) and the usual intake for ultra-endurance athletes (60 g/h) during a mountain marathon on internal exercise load, and post-exercise neuromuscular function and recovery of high intensity run capacity. Methods: Twenty-six elite trail-runners were randomly distributed into three groups: LOW (60 g/h), MED (90 g/h) and HIGH (120 g/h), according to CHO intake during a 4000-m cumulative slope mountain marathon. Runners were measured using the Abalakov Jump test, a maximum a half-squat test and an aerobic power-capacity test at baseline (T1) and 24 h after completing the race (T2). Results: Changes in Abalakov jump time (ABKJT), Abalakov jump height (ABKH), half-squat test 1 repetition maximum (HST1RM) between T1 and T2 showed significant differences by Wilcoxon signed rank test only in LOW and MED (p < 0.05), but not in the HIGH group (p > 0.05). Internal load was significantly lower in the HIGH group (p = 0.017) regarding LOW and MED by Mann Whitney u test. A significantly lower change during the study in ABKJT (p = 0.038), ABKH (p = 0.038) HST1RM (p = 0.041) and in terms of fatigue (p = 0.018) and lactate (p = 0.012) within the aerobic power-capacity test was presented in HIGH relative to LOW and MED. Conclusions: 120 g/h CHO intake during a mountain marathon might limit neuromuscular fatigue and improve recovery of high intensity run capacity 24 h after a physiologically challenging event when compared to 90 g/h and 60 g/h.

Nitric oxide related ergogenic aids such as arginine (Arg) have shown to impact positively on sport performance through several physiological and metabolic mechanisms. However, research results have shown to be controversial. The great differences regarding required metabolic pathways and physiological demands between aerobic and anaerobic sport disciplines could be the reasons. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of Arg supplementation on aerobic (≤VO2max) and anaerobic (>VO2max) performance. Likewise, to show the effective dose and timing of this supplementation. A structured search was carried out in accordance with PRISMA® (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement and PICOS guidelines in PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science (WOS), and Scopus databases from inception to January 2020. Eighteen studies were included which compare Arg supplementation with placebo in an identical situation and testing its effects on aerobic and anaerobic performance tests. Trials analyzing supplementation with other supplements were removed and there was not athlete’s level, gender, ethnicity, or age filters. The performed meta-analysis included 15 studies and random effects model and pooled standardized mean differences (SMD) were used according to Hedges’ g. Results revealed that Arg supplementation could improve aerobic (SMD, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.12 to 1.56; magnitude of SMD (MSMD), large; I2, 89%; p = 0.02) and anaerobic (SMD, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.43; MSMD, small; I2, 0%; p = 0.01) performance tests. In conclusion, acute Arg supplementation protocols to improve aerobic and anaerobic performance should be adjusted to 0.15 g/kg of body weight ingested between 60–90 min before. Moreover, chronic Arg supplementation should include 1.5–2 g/day for 4–7 weeks in order to improve aerobic performance, and 10–12 g/day for 8 weeks to enhance anaerobic performance.

Citrulline (CIT) and nitrate-rich beetroot extract (BR) are widely studied ergogenic aids. Nevertheless, both supplements have been studied in short-term trials and separately. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the effects of combining CIT and BR supplementation on recovery status observed by distance covered in the Cooper test, exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD) and anabolic/catabolic hormone status have not been investigated to date. Therefore, the main purpose of this research was to assess the effect of the long-term (9 weeks) mixture of 3 g/day of CIT plus 2.1 g/day of BR (300 mg/day of nitrates (NO3−)) supplementation on recovery by distance covered in the Cooper test, EIMD markers (urea, creatinine, AST, ALT, GGT, LDH and CK) and anabolic/catabolic hormones (testosterone, cortisol and testosterone/cortisol ratio (T/C)) in male trained triathletes. Thirty-two triathletes were randomized into four different groups of eight triathletes in this double-blind, placebo-controlled trial: placebo group (PLG), CIT group (CITG; 3 g/day of CIT), BR group (BRG; 2.1 g/day of BR (300 mg/day of NO3−)) and CIT-BR group (CIT-BRG; 3 g/day of CIT plus 2.1 g/day of BR (300 mg/day of NO3−)). Distance covered in the Cooper test and blood samples were collected from all participants at baseline (T1) and after 9 weeks of supplementation (T2). There were no significant differences in the interaction between group and time in EIMD markers (urea, creatinine, AST, ALT, GGT, LDH and CK) (p > 0.05). However, significant differences were observed in the group-by-time interaction in distance covered in the Cooper test (p = 0.002; η2p = 0.418), cortisol (p = 0.044; η2p = 0.247) and T/C (p = 0.005; η²p = 0.359). Concretely, significant differences were observed in distance covered in the Cooper test percentage of change (p = 0.002; η²p = 0.418) between CIT-BRG and PLG and CITG, in cortisol percentage change (p = 0.049; η2p = 0.257) and in T/C percentage change (p = 0.018; η2p = 0.297) between CIT-BRG and PLG. In conclusion, the combination of 3 g/day of CIT plus 2.1 g/day of BR (300 mg/day of NO3−) supplementation for 9 weeks did not present any benefit for EIMD. However, CIT + BR improved recovery status by preventing an increase in cortisol and showing an increase in distance covered in the Cooper test and T/C.

Background: There are many athletes who like to listen to music while making a high intensity effort. However, research into the effects of listening to music on athletic performance has provided controversial results, and it is suggested that the timing and type of music might affect the anaerobic performance response. Purpose: The main aim of the current systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze the effects while listening to music tasks via the 30 s Wingate anaerobic test (WAnT) on absolute performance and relative peak power (APP and RPP), absolute and relative mean power (AMP and RMP), and fatigue index (FI). Methods: PRISMA guidelines were used as a basis for conducting this systematic review, with inclusion criteria being set out according to the PICOS model. Computer-based literature research was undertaken until 10 March 2020 using the following online databases: PubMed/Medline, WOS, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. The literature was reviewed with regard to the effects of listening to music on the WAnT using several music variables on: APP, RPP, AMP, RMP and FI. Hedges’ g formula was used to calculate both standard mean differences and 95% confidence intervals, in order to establish continuous outcomes. Furthermore, the I2 statistic evaluated systematic differences (heterogeneity) together with a random effect meta-analysis model. Results: This systematic review included nine articles that researched into the effects of music on WAnT performance (six studies describe improvements in APP and/or RPP, four in AMP and/or RMP and three in FI). The random effects model was used to undertake a final meta-analysis, with standardized mean differences (SMD) and magnitude of standardized mean differences (MSMD) (Hedges’ g) being pooled accordingly. The resulting meta-analysis incorporated eight studies that had been previously published, with results showing that there were no apparent beneficial effects on APP (p = 0.09), AMP (p = 0.33) and FI (p = 0.46) as a consequence of listening to music. However, listening to music showed beneficial effects on RPP (SMD: 0.65; 95%: CI 0.35 to 0.96; MSMD: moderate; I2, 0%; p < 0.001) and RMP (SMD: 1.03; 95%: CI, 0.63 to 1.42; MSMD: trivial; I2, 0%; p < 0.001). Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis has shown that listening to music during the WAnT might physiologically enhance relative anaerobic exercise performance, although reasons remain speculative.