Fatigue and recovery in children and adults during sustained contractions at 2 different submaximal intensities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of submaximal sustained contractions on fatigue and recovery properties in untrained prepubescent boys (n = 14) and men (n = 14). All participants performed, in random order, an isometric plantar flexion at 20% and 60% of their maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) until exhaustion (20%fatigue and 60%fatigue, respectively). During both fatigue protocols, surface electromyogram (sEMG) of the soleus and tibialis anterior muscles was recorded. Before and after the fatigue protocol, MVCs and blood lactate concentration were obtained. During 20%fatigue and 60%fatigue, agonist and antagonist sEMG increased gradually to a similar extent in both groups. Immediately after fatigue, MVC torque decreased in both groups, compared with prefatigue values, and boys recovered faster than men in both fatigue protocols. The reduction in agonist sEMG during MVC after fatigue was not significantly different between men and boys (p < 0.05), independent of the fatigue protocol. sEMG of boys recovered to baseline values 3 min after the 20%fatigue and 60%fatigue protocols, whereas men did not recover. Lactate concentration increased immediately after the end of the fatigue protocols, compared with the prefatigue values (p < 0.05). This increase was higher for the 60%fatigue than for 20%fatigue protocol, and did not differ between boys and men. It is concluded that low- and middle-intensity submaximal sustained isometric fatigue protocols induce similar fatigue effects in boys and men. Furthermore, it was shown that boys can recover faster than men, independent of the contraction intensity that induces fatigue.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".