MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Short-term high- vs. low-velocity isokinetic lengthening training results in greater hypertrophy of the elbow flexors in young men

2005· article· en· W2137683098 on OpenAlexaff
Tim N. Shepstone, Jason E. Tang, Stephane Dallaire, Mark D. Schuenke, Robert S. Staron, Stuart M. Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBicepsMedicineMuscle hypertrophyElbowMuscle contractionInternal medicineCardiologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations196
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysiologySame topicSports Performance and TrainingFrench-language works237,207