Cross-education of wrist extensor strength is not influenced by non-dominant training in right-handers

Coombs, Timothy A.; Frazer, Ashlyn K.; Horvath, Deanna; Pearce, Alan J.; Howatson, Glyn; Kidgell, Dawson

doi:10.1007/s00421-016-3436-5

Cited by 53 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also consistent with previous cross-education of strength studies, was the 23% increase in strength for the untrained bicep brachii (Goodwill et al 2012;Latella et al, 2012, Kidgell et al 2011Coombs et al 2016, Farthing et al 2005. Although current systematic reviews report lower magnitudes of cross-education (Carroll et al 2006;Munn et al 2004), these training paradigms typically employ only moderate intensity and untimed contractions, which seems to lessen the cross-education effect (Kidgell et al 2011;Goodwill et al 2012, Coombs et al 2016).…”

Section: Unilateral Strength Training Improves Strength Of the Untraisupporting

confidence: 80%

“…To our knowledge, this is only the third study to report a reduction in silent period following the crosseducation of strength (Coombs et al 2016;Zult et al 2016). Because there was no interaction effect for reduced corticomotor inhibition in the untrained synergist wrist flexors, it seems that the motor cortical response to cross-education is spatially confined to the untrained homologous agonist muscle.…”

Section: Corticomotor Inhibition Is Restricted To the Untrained Agonimentioning

confidence: 69%

“…Although current systematic reviews report lower magnitudes of cross-education (Carroll et al 2006;Munn et al 2004), these training paradigms typically employ only moderate intensity and untimed contractions, which seems to lessen the cross-education effect (Kidgell et al 2011;Goodwill et al 2012, Coombs et al 2016). …”

Section: Unilateral Strength Training Improves Strength Of the Untraimentioning

confidence: 87%

“…The reduction in the AURC for corticomotor inhibition, suggest that an important neural adaptation to cross-education, is a reduction in silent period duration to the untrained homologous agonist muscle. Overall, it looks as if unilateral strength training targets specific populations of intracortical inhibitory neurons that collectively result in increased activation of the target motor neuron pool (Coombs et al 2016;Hendy et al 2015;Hortobágyi et al 2011). On the other hand, critical to the purpose of this study, it only occurs in the untrained contralateral homologous agonist muscle.…”

Section: Corticomotor Inhibition Is Restricted To the Untrained Agonimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The primary motor cortex (iM1) ipsilateral to the training limb has been shown to play an important role in mediating the cross-education effect Lee et al 2010;Hendy et al 2015;Frazer et al 2017). Specifically, cross-education studies have reported increased corticomotor excitability , decreased corticomotor inhibition (Coombs et al 2016;Zult et al 2016;Hendy and Kidgell 2014;Hendy et al 2015), reduced interhemispheric inhibition (IHI) Zult et al 2016) and increased voluntary activation (Lee et al 2009) in the M1 ipsilateral to the training limb. In support of this, several imaging and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) studies have revealed increased excitability of the ipsilateral M1 of a resting limb during unilateral voluntary contractions (increased cross-activation) (Hortobágyi et al 2003;Liepert et al 2001;Muellbacher et al 2000;Frazer et al 2017;Hendy and Kidgell 2014;Zult et al 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Ipsilateral corticomotor responses are confined to the homologous muscle following cross-education of muscular strength

Mason

Frazer

Horvath³

et al. 2018

Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Northumbria University has developed Northumbria Research Link (NRL) to enable users to access the University's research output. Copyright © and moral rights for items on NRL are retained by the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. Single copies of full items can be reproduced, displayed or performed, and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided the authors, title and full bibliographic details are given, as well as a hyperlink and/or URL to the original metadata page. The content must not be changed in any way. Full items must not be sold commercially in any format or medium without formal permission of the copyright holder. The full policy is available online: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/policies.html This document may differ from the final, published version of the research and has been made available online in accordance with publisher policies. To read and/or cite from the published version of the research, please visit the publisher's website (a subscription may be required.) men, aged 18-35 years; training group; n = 10 and control group; n = 10) before and after 3-weeks of strengthtraining the right biceps brachii at 80% of 1-repetition maximum (1-RM). Recruitment-curves for corticomotor excitability and inhibition of the untrained homologous and non-homologous muscle were constructed and assessed by examining the area under the recruitment curve (AURC). Strength-training increased strength of the trained elbow flexors (29%), resulting in a 18% increase in contralateral strength of the untrained elbow flexors (P <0.0001). The trained wrist flexors increased by 19%, resulting in a 12% increase in strength of the untrained wrist flexors (P = 0.005). TMS showed increased corticomotor excitability and decreased corticomotor inhibition for the untrained homologous muscle (P < 0.05); however, there were no changes in the untrained non-homologous muscle (P > 0.05). These findings show that the cross-education of muscular strength is spatially distributed; however, the neural adaptations are confined to the motor pathway ipsilateral to the untrained homologous agonist.

show abstract

Section: Unilateral Strength Training Improves Strength Of the Untraisupporting

confidence: 80%

Section: Corticomotor Inhibition Is Restricted To the Untrained Agonimentioning

confidence: 69%

Section: Unilateral Strength Training Improves Strength Of the Untraimentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Corticomotor Inhibition Is Restricted To the Untrained Agonimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Ipsilateral corticomotor responses are confined to the homologous muscle following cross-education of muscular strength

Mason

Frazer

Horvath³

et al. 2018

Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The ipsilateral corticospinal responses to cross-education are dependent upon the motor-training intervention

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to identify the ipsilateral corticospinal responses of the contralateral limb following different types of unilateral motor-training. Three groups performing unilateral slow-paced strength training (SPST), non-paced strength training (NPST) or visuomotor skill training (VT) were compared to a control group. It was hypothesised that 4 weeks of unilateral SPST and VT, but not NPST, would increase ipsilateral corticospinal excitability (CSE) and reduce short-interval cortical inhibition (SICI), resulting in greater performance gains of the untrained limb. Tracking error of the untrained limb reduced by 29 and 41% following 2 and 4 weeks of VT. Strength of the untrained limb increased by 8 and 16% following 2 and 4 weeks of SPST and by 6 and 13% following NPST. There was no difference in cross-education of strength or tracking error. For the trained limb, SPST and NPST increased strength (28 and 26%), and VT improved by 47 and 58%. SPST and VT increased ipsilateral CSE by 89 and 71% at 2 weeks. Ipsilateral CSE increased 105 and 81% at 4 weeks following SPST and VT. The NPST group and control group showed no changes at 2 and 4 weeks. SPST and VT reduced ipsilateral SICI by 45 and 47% at 2 weeks; at 4 weeks, SPST and VT reduced SICI by 48 and 38%. The ipsilateral corticospinal responses are determined by the type of motor-training. There were no differences in motor performance between SPST, NPST and VT. The data suggests that the corticospinal responses to cross-education are different and determined by the type of motor-training.

show abstract

Cross-education of muscular strength is facilitated by homeostatic plasticity

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The novel findings of this study include: priming the ipsilateral M1 via anodal tDCS prior to a single bout of strength training augments the cross-transfer of strength which is manifested by an increase in corticospinal excitability and cross-activation. These findings provide insight into how priming methods that induce homeostatic plasticity may be used to enhance the cross-education phenomenon.

show abstract

Cross-education of wrist extensor strength is not influenced by non-dominant training in right-handers

Cited by 53 publications

References 39 publications

Ipsilateral corticomotor responses are confined to the homologous muscle following cross-education of muscular strength

Ipsilateral corticomotor responses are confined to the homologous muscle following cross-education of muscular strength

The ipsilateral corticospinal responses to cross-education are dependent upon the motor-training intervention

Cross-education of muscular strength is facilitated by homeostatic plasticity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About