Post by John A. Casler on Jul 4, 2007 18:49:31 GMT -8
jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/abstract/98/5/1768
J Appl Physiol 98: 1768-1776, 2005. First published January 7, 2005; doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.01027.2004
8750-7587/05 $8.00
This Article
PubMed Citation
Articles by Shepstone, T. N.
Articles by Phillips, S. M.
Short-term high- vs. low-velocity isokinetic lengthening training results in greater hypertrophy of the elbow flexors in young men
Tim N. Shepstone,1 Jason E. Tang,1 Stephane Dallaire,1 Mark D. Schuenke,2 Robert S. Staron,2 and Stuart M. Phillips1
1Exercise and Metabolism Research Group, Department of Kinesiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; and 2Department of Biomedical Sciences, College of Osteopathic Medicine, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio
Submitted 16 September 2004 ; accepted in final form 29 December 2004
We performed two studies to determine the effect of a resistive training program comprised of fast vs. slow isokinetic lengthening contractions on muscle fiber hypertrophy. In study I, we investigated the effect of fast (3.66 rad/s; Fast) or slow (0.35 rad/s; Slow) isokinetic high-resistance muscle lengthening contractions on muscle fiber and whole muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) of the elbow flexors was investigated in young men. Twelve subjects (23.8 ± 2.4 yr; means ± SD) performed maximal resistive lengthening isokinetic exercise with both arms for 8 wk (3 days/wk), during which they trained one arm at a Fast velocity while the contralateral arm performed an equivalent number of contractions at a Slow velocity. Before (Pre) and after (Post) the training, percutaneous muscle biopsies were taken from the midbelly of the biceps brachii and analyzed for fiber type and CSA. Type I muscle fiber size increased Pre to Post (P < 0.05) in both Fast and Slow arms. Type IIa and IIx muscle fiber CSA increased in both arms, but the increases were greater in the Fast- vs. the Slow-trained arm (P < 0.05). Elbow flexor CSA increased in Fast and Slow arms, with the increase in the Fast arm showing a trend toward being greater (P = 0.06). Maximum torque-generating capacity also increased to a greater degree (P < 0.05) in the Fast arm, regardless of testing velocity. In study II, we attempted to provide some explanation of the greater hypertrophy observed in study I by examining an indicator of protein remodeling (Z-line streaming), which we hypothesized would be greater in the Fast condition. Nine men (21.7 ± 2.4 yr) performed an acute bout (n = 30, 3 sets x 10 repetitions/set) of maximal lengthening contractions at Fast and Slow velocities used in the training study. Biopsies revealed that Fast lengthening contractions resulted in more (185 ± 1 7%; P < 0.01) Z-band streaming per millimeter squared muscle vs. the Slow arm. In conclusion, training using Fast (3.66 rad/s) lengthening contractions leads to greater hypertrophy and strength gains than Slow (0.35 rad/s) lengthening contractions. The greater hypertrophy seen in the Fast-trained arm (study I) may be related to a greater amount of protein remodeling (Z-band streaming; study II).
J Appl Physiol 98: 1768-1776, 2005. First published January 7, 2005; doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.01027.2004
8750-7587/05 $8.00
This Article
PubMed Citation
Articles by Shepstone, T. N.
Articles by Phillips, S. M.
Short-term high- vs. low-velocity isokinetic lengthening training results in greater hypertrophy of the elbow flexors in young men
Tim N. Shepstone,1 Jason E. Tang,1 Stephane Dallaire,1 Mark D. Schuenke,2 Robert S. Staron,2 and Stuart M. Phillips1
1Exercise and Metabolism Research Group, Department of Kinesiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; and 2Department of Biomedical Sciences, College of Osteopathic Medicine, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio
Submitted 16 September 2004 ; accepted in final form 29 December 2004
We performed two studies to determine the effect of a resistive training program comprised of fast vs. slow isokinetic lengthening contractions on muscle fiber hypertrophy. In study I, we investigated the effect of fast (3.66 rad/s; Fast) or slow (0.35 rad/s; Slow) isokinetic high-resistance muscle lengthening contractions on muscle fiber and whole muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) of the elbow flexors was investigated in young men. Twelve subjects (23.8 ± 2.4 yr; means ± SD) performed maximal resistive lengthening isokinetic exercise with both arms for 8 wk (3 days/wk), during which they trained one arm at a Fast velocity while the contralateral arm performed an equivalent number of contractions at a Slow velocity. Before (Pre) and after (Post) the training, percutaneous muscle biopsies were taken from the midbelly of the biceps brachii and analyzed for fiber type and CSA. Type I muscle fiber size increased Pre to Post (P < 0.05) in both Fast and Slow arms. Type IIa and IIx muscle fiber CSA increased in both arms, but the increases were greater in the Fast- vs. the Slow-trained arm (P < 0.05). Elbow flexor CSA increased in Fast and Slow arms, with the increase in the Fast arm showing a trend toward being greater (P = 0.06). Maximum torque-generating capacity also increased to a greater degree (P < 0.05) in the Fast arm, regardless of testing velocity. In study II, we attempted to provide some explanation of the greater hypertrophy observed in study I by examining an indicator of protein remodeling (Z-line streaming), which we hypothesized would be greater in the Fast condition. Nine men (21.7 ± 2.4 yr) performed an acute bout (n = 30, 3 sets x 10 repetitions/set) of maximal lengthening contractions at Fast and Slow velocities used in the training study. Biopsies revealed that Fast lengthening contractions resulted in more (185 ± 1 7%; P < 0.01) Z-band streaming per millimeter squared muscle vs. the Slow arm. In conclusion, training using Fast (3.66 rad/s) lengthening contractions leads to greater hypertrophy and strength gains than Slow (0.35 rad/s) lengthening contractions. The greater hypertrophy seen in the Fast-trained arm (study I) may be related to a greater amount of protein remodeling (Z-band streaming; study II).