The training sessions were not monitored; however, subjects PF-6463922 in vitro were required to submit training logs to the primary investigator

on a biweekly basis (at the conclusion of each micro-cycle). Training volume was calculated as the sum of the load lifted multiplied by the number of repetitions performed during each week for the bench press and back squat, respectively. Work capacity for bench press and back squat was assessed by comparing percent improvement in training volume for each micro-cycle (week 1 vs. week 2; week 3 vs. week 4; week 5 vs. week 6). Statistical analysis An independent samples t-test was used to examine differences between groups for pre-trial BF % and training experience. A 2 × 5 Mixed Factorial ANOVA with Repeated Measures was used to determine the difference between groups (placebo and betaine) and time for changes in urinary HCTL from baseline and week to week. Two 2 × 6 Mixed Factorial ANOVA with Repeated Measures were used to determine differences between groups and time for bench press and back squat work capacity at each training micro-cycle. If significant interactions were found, percent improvements at each micro-cycle was calculated and compared between groups with an independent samples t-test. Eight 2 × 2 Mixed Factorial ANOVAs with Repeated Fludarabine Measures were used to determine differences in arm CSA, thigh CSA, BF %, LBM, FM, vertical jump, bench press

1 RM, and back squat 1 RM between groups and time (pre- vs. post-trial). All statistical analyses were analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS v. 19, IBM) and the alpha level was set at .05. Results All values are presented as means ± standard deviations. A significant interaction (p = .001) between group

and time existed for bench press work capacity (Figure  1). Bench press training volume increased with placebo at micro-cycles 2 and 3, and for betaine at micro-cycles 1 and 3 (Table  2). Post hoc analysis revealed the betaine group improved significantly more than placebo at micro-cycle one (7.89 ± 2.65% vs. 0.49 ± 1.69%, p = .001) and three (16.67 ± 1.51% vs. 12.00 ± 4.21%, p = .05); however, the percent improvement for placebo was significantly greater than betaine at micro-cycle two (19.2 ± 11.2% vs. 5.9 ± 1.4%, Liothyronine Sodium p = .001). Figure 1 Percent change in bench press volume for placebo (n = 12) and betaine (n = 11) for 3 training micro-cycles. Note: * = Significantly (p < .05) different than placebo. Table 2 Changes in bench press training volume (kg) for placebo (n = 12) and betaine (n = 11) between three micro-cycles   Pre Post ∆ P Micro Cycle 1 Betaine 2736 ± 463 2953 ± 500 216 ± 39 .01 Placebo 3154 ± 553 3170 ± 555 15 ± 70 .44 Micro Cycle 2 Betaine 1755 ± 296 1858 ± 315 103 ± 25 .30 Placebo 2320 ± 406 2903 ± 672 583 ± 288 .01 Micro Cycle 3 Betaine 2160 ± 365 2520 ± 427 360 ± 101 .01 Placebo 2481 ± 435 2779 ± 487 298 ± 62 .01 A significant main effect (p = .001) of time existed for squat work capacity.