Neuromuscular Adaptations After 2 and 4 Weeks of 80% Versus 30% 1 Repetition Maximum Resistance Training to Failure

Jenkins, Nathaniel D.M.; Housh, Terry J.; Buckner, Samuel L.; Bergstrom, Haley C.; Cochrane, Kristen C.; Hill, Ethan C.; Smith, Cory M.; Schmidt, Richard J.; Johnson, Glen O.; Cramer, Joel T.

doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000001308

Cited by 73 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These data add to the growing body of literature that has demonstrated comparable hypertrophic adaptations in response to high- vs. low-load resistance training (Mitchell et al, 2012; Ogasawara et al, 2013; Schoenfeld et al, 2015; Jenkins et al, 2016). Hypertrophy has historically been thought to be minimal during the initial stages of resistance training (Moritani and deVries, 1979; Sale, 1988; Gabriel et al, 2006).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 59%

“…However, training at 80% 1RM induced greater strength gains, which has been demonstrated repeatedly (Campos et al, 2002; Mitchell et al, 2012; Ogasawara et al, 2013; Schoenfeld et al, 2015; Jenkins et al, 2016). The unique contributions of this study were the robust measurements (VA and EMG QAMP during maximal and submaximal torque levels) used to elucidate any potential underlying neural factors.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 59%

“…Hypertrophy has historically been thought to be minimal during the initial stages of resistance training (Moritani and deVries, 1979; Sale, 1988; Gabriel et al, 2006). Yet, several recent studies (Seynnes et al, 2007; DeFreitas et al, 2011; Jenkins et al, 2016) have shown 4–9% increases in muscle size following 3–4 weeks of resistance training in previously untrained men and women. The present findings supported previous studies (Seynnes et al, 2007; DeFreitas et al, 2011; Mitchell et al, 2012; Ogasawara et al, 2013; Schoenfeld et al, 2015; Jenkins et al, 2016) suggesting that (a) hypertrophy is similar in response to training with high- and low-loads to failure and (b) muscle hypertrophy occurs within the first few weeks of a resistance training program.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on previous studies (Mitchell et al, 2012; Ogasawara et al, 2013; Jenkins et al, 2016), we hypothesized that resistance training at 80 and 30% 1RM to failure would elicit similar muscle hypertrophy, but that muscle strength would increase to a greater extent following training at 80% 1RM and that this would be accompanied by greater evidence of neural adaptation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…However, several recent experimental studies (Burd et al, 2010; Mitchell et al, 2012; Ogasawara et al, 2013; Jenkins et al, 2016) have called these recommendations in to question. Specifically, low-load (i.e., 30% 1RM) and high-load (i.e., 80–90% 1RM) resistance training have been shown to elicit similar acute increases in muscle protein synthesis (Burd et al, 2010) and comparable muscle hypertrophy in chronic resistance training models (Mitchell et al, 2012; Ogasawara et al, 2013; Jenkins et al, 2016). As a result, there has been a debate (Burd et al, 2013; Schuenke et al, 2013) regarding the most effective resistance exercise loads to prescribe for hypertrophy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Greater Neural Adaptations following High- vs. Low-Load Resistance Training

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined the neuromuscular adaptations following 3 and 6 weeks of 80 vs. 30% one repetition maximum (1RM) resistance training to failure in the leg extensors. Twenty-six men (age = 23.1 ± 4.7 years) were randomly assigned to a high- (80% 1RM; n = 13) or low-load (30% 1RM; n = 13) resistance training group and completed leg extension resistance training to failure 3 times per week for 6 weeks. Testing was completed at baseline, 3, and 6 weeks of training. During each testing session, ultrasound muscle thickness and echo intensity, 1RM strength, maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) strength, and contractile properties of the quadriceps femoris were measured. Percent voluntary activation (VA) and electromyographic (EMG) amplitude were measured during MVIC, and during randomly ordered isometric step muscle actions at 10–100% of baseline MVIC. There were similar increases in muscle thickness from Baseline to Week 3 and 6 in the 80 and 30% 1RM groups. However, both 1RM and MVIC strength increased from Baseline to Week 3 and 6 to a greater degree in the 80% than 30% 1RM group. VA during MVIC was also greater in the 80 vs. 30% 1RM group at Week 6, and only training at 80% 1RM elicited a significant increase in EMG amplitude during MVIC. The peak twitch torque to MVIC ratio was also significantly reduced in the 80%, but not 30% 1RM group, at Week 3 and 6. Finally, VA and EMG amplitude were reduced during submaximal torque production as a result of training at 80% 1RM, but not 30% 1RM. Despite eliciting similar hypertrophy, 80% 1RM improved muscle strength more than 30% 1RM, and was accompanied by increases in VA and EMG amplitude during maximal force production. Furthermore, training at 80% 1RM resulted in a decreased neural cost to produce the same relative submaximal torques after training, whereas training at 30% 1RM did not. Therefore, our data suggest that high-load training results in greater neural adaptations that may explain the disparate increases in muscle strength despite similar hypertrophy following high- and low-load training programs.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 59%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 59%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Greater Neural Adaptations following High- vs. Low-Load Resistance Training

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The problem Of muscle hypertrophy: Revisited

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we revisit a topic originally discussed in 1955, namely the lack of direct evidence that muscle hypertrophy from exercise plays an important role in increasing strength. To this day, long-term adaptations in strength are thought to be primarily contingent on changes in muscle size. Given this assumption, there has been considerable attention placed on programs designed to allow for maximization of both muscle size and strength. However, the conclusion that a change in muscle size affects a change in strength is surprisingly based on little evidence. We suggest that these changes may be completely separate phenomena based on: (1) the weak correlation between the change in muscle size and the change in muscle strength after training; (2) the loss of muscle mass with detraining, yet a maintenance of muscle strength; and (3) the similar muscle growth between low-load and high-load resistance training, yet divergent results in strength. Muscle Nerve 54: 1012-1014, 2016.

show abstract