1996
DOI: 10.1080/00140139608964505
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Influence of two different modes of resistance training in female subjects

Abstract: In resistance training, it has been empirically accepted that muscle hypertrophy is developed by low intensity and high volume training, while muscle strength and power are developed by high intensity and low volume training. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the influence of two different modes of resistance training on isokinetic strength and muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) in females. Eleven females, who had no experience in resistance training, participated in this study and were random… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

4
26
1

Year Published

2001
2001
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
4
26
1
Order By: Relevance
“…It is possible that differences in the exercise prescription and types of training equipment among studies could account for the variability in strength increases. The change in whole-muscle CSA seen by us at 12 weeks is similar (5.5% versus 5.9%) to that reported by Ploutz-Snyder et al 19 Hisaeda et al 11 studied two groups of young women (mean age, 20 years) before and after 4 and 8 weeks of knee extensor ST. Quadriceps femoris CSA showed a nonsignificant change of 1-1.8% after 4 weeks and a significant 3.2-3.4% increase after 8 weeks. Thus, hypertrophy was not seen early in training in young women.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
“…It is possible that differences in the exercise prescription and types of training equipment among studies could account for the variability in strength increases. The change in whole-muscle CSA seen by us at 12 weeks is similar (5.5% versus 5.9%) to that reported by Ploutz-Snyder et al 19 Hisaeda et al 11 studied two groups of young women (mean age, 20 years) before and after 4 and 8 weeks of knee extensor ST. Quadriceps femoris CSA showed a nonsignificant change of 1-1.8% after 4 weeks and a significant 3.2-3.4% increase after 8 weeks. Thus, hypertrophy was not seen early in training in young women.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
“…Interestingly, the hypertrophic response was similar between both the Low Rep and Int Rep groups. It has often been accepted that improved strength/power results from high intensity/low volume training, whereas low intensity/ high volume training maximizes muscle hypertrophy (Hisaeda et al 1996). Based on data from the present investigation, this may not be entirely true.…”
Section: Muscle Fiber Type and Cross-sectional Areacontrasting
confidence: 51%
“…Some studies have used indirect methods to measure changes in cross-sectional area (magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound scanning) and have reported similar area and strength adaptations in young men (Chestnut and Docherty 1999), young women (Hisaeda et al 1996), and early postmenopausal women (Bemben et al 2000) subjected to different sets/repetition maximum training protocols. To our knowledge, only two studies have investigated the effects of different types of resistance training programs on skeletal muscle utilizing muscle biopsy sampling (Jackson et al 1990;Taaffe et al 1996), and neither of these specifically addressed the ''strengthendurance continuum''.…”
Section: Muscle Fiber Type and Cross-sectional Areamentioning
confidence: 97%
“…According to the report of Akima et al (2000), the change in the volume of knee extensors after 20 days of bed rest was 8%. On the other hand, hypertrophic changes in the quadriceps CSA, which have been observed in previous studies using short-term (8-±10 weeks) resistance training, are less than 9% (Higibie et al 1996;Hisaeda et al 1996;Jones and Rutheford 1987;Narici et al 1989). Judging from the magnitude of SEE, therefore, it seems that the equation derived in this study for predicting MV cannot account for hypertrophic and/or atrophic changes in the relatively short term.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 51%