Peak power is reduced following lengthening contractions despite a maintenance of shortening velocity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following repetitive lengthening contractions, power (the product of torque and velocity) is impaired during shortening contractions. However, the relative contribution of each component to power loss and the underlying factors are unclear. We investigated neuromuscular properties of the dorsiflexors in 8 males (27 ± 3 years) and 8 females (26 ± 4 years) for a potential sex-related difference before, during, and after 150 unaccustomed maximal lengthening actions. Velocity-dependent power was determined from shortening contractions at 8 levels (1 N · m to 70% of maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVC)) before, after, and throughout recovery assessed at 0-30 min, 24 h, and 48 h. Immediately following task termination, both sexes displayed similar impairments of 30%, 4%, and 10% in MVC torque, shortening velocity, and overall peak power, respectively (P < 0.05). Peak rate of isometric torque development (RTD) was reduced by 10% in males, but females exhibited a 35% reduction (P < 0.05). Rate of torque development for the MVC remained depressed in both sexes throughout the 30 min recovery period; however, the RTD returned to normal by 24 h in males but did not recover by 48 h in females. Power was reduced preferentially at higher loads (i.e., 60% MVC), with a greater loss in females (65%) than males (45%). For lower loads (<20% MVC), power was impaired minimally (4%-8%; P < 0.05) and recovered within 30 min in both groups. The reduction in maximal angular velocity persisted until 30 min of recovery, and peak power did not recover until 24 h for both sexes. Unaccustomed lengthening contractions decreased power preferentially at higher loads, whereas peak power was reduced minimally owing to maintenance of maximal shortening velocity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".