What makes long-term resistance-trained individuals so strong? A comparison of skeletal muscle morphology, architecture, and joint mechanics.

MADEN-WILKINSON, Thomas M, BALSHAW, Thomas Grant, MASSEY, Garry and FOLLAND, Jonathan P (2019). What makes long-term resistance-trained individuals so strong? A comparison of skeletal muscle morphology, architecture, and joint mechanics. Journal of Applied Physiology.

[img] PDF
Maden-Wilkinson What makes long-term resistance-trained individuals so strong.pdf - Accepted Version
Restricted to Repository staff only until 24 December 2020.
All rights reserved.

Download (9MB)
Official URL: https://www.physiology.org/doi/abs/10.1152/japplph...
Link to published version:: https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00224.2019
Related URLs:

    Abstract

    The greater muscular strength of long-term resistance-trained (LTT) individuals is often attributed to hypertrophy but the role of other factors, notably maximum voluntary specific tension (ST), muscle architecture and any differences in joint mechanics (moment arm) have not been documented. The aim of the present study was to examine the musculoskeletal factors that might explain the greater Quadriceps strength and size of LTT vs untrained (UT) individuals. LTT (n = 16, age 21.6 ± 2.0 years) had 4.0 ± 0.8 years of systematic knee extensor heavy-resistance training experience, whereas UT (n = 52; age 25.1 ± 2.3 years) had no lower-body resistance training experience for > 18 months. Knee extension dynamometry, T1-weighted magnetic resonance images of the thigh and knee and ultrasonography of the Quadriceps muscle group at 10 locations were used to determine Quadriceps: isometric maximal voluntary torque (MVT), muscle volume (QVOL), patella tendon moment arm (PTMA), pennation angle (QΘP) and fascicle length (QFL), physiological cross-sectional area (QPCSA) and ST. LTT had substantially greater MVT (+60% vs UT, P<0.001) and QVOL (+56%, P<0.001) and QPCSA (+41%, P<0.001) but smaller differences in ST (+9%, P<0.05) and moment arm (+4%, P<0.05), and thus muscle size was the primary explanation for the greater strength of LTT. The greater muscle size (volume) of LTT was primarily attributable to the greater QPCSA (+41%; indicating more sarcomeres in parallel) rather than the more modest difference in FL (+11%; indicating more sarcomeres in series). There was no evidence for regional hypertrophy after LTT.

    Item Type: Article
    Uncontrolled Keywords: Muscle Architecture; Regional Hypertrophy; Skeletal Muscle; Specific Tension; Strength Training; 06 Biological Sciences; 11 Medical and Health Sciences; Physiology
    Identification Number: https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00224.2019
    SWORD Depositor: Symplectic Elements
    Depositing User: Symplectic Elements
    Date Deposited: 16 Jan 2020 12:23
    Last Modified: 16 Jan 2020 12:30
    URI: http://shura.shu.ac.uk/id/eprint/25683

    Actions (login required)

    View Item View Item

    Downloads

    Downloads per month over past year

    View more statistics