Comparison of muscle cross-sectional area and strength between untrained women and men

  • H. Kanehisa
  • S. Ikegawa
  • T. Fukunaga
Article

Abstract

The cross-sectional areas (CSA) of fat, muscle and bone tissues of the limb as well as maximal voluntary isokinetic strength were measured in untrained men (n=27) and women (n=26) aged 18–25 years. Anatomical CSA of the three tissues were determined by ultrasound on the upper arm and thigh. The isokinetic strength of the elbow and knee extensor and flexor muscles were measured by an isokinetic dynamometer (Cybex 11) at 1.05 rad · s−1. The women had significantly (P<0.001) larger fat CSA and smaller bone and muscle CSA than the men in both the upper arm and thigh. Among tissue CSA, the largest difference between the women and men was found in fat CSA regardless of the measurement sites. The sex differences in bone and muscle CSA were found largely in the upper arm compared to the thigh, even when expressed per unit second power of the limb length. Regression analyses of the data for respective samples for the men and women showed significant correlations (r=0.411−0.707, P < 0.05−P < 0.001) between CSA and strength in all muscle groups except for the elbow extensors of the men (r=0.328, P>0.05) and the elbow flexors of the women (r=0.388, P>0.05). No significant difference between sexes was observed when strength was expressed per unit of muscle CSA (F · CSA−1) for the elbow flexors and extensors. However, the men showed significantly higher F · CSA−1 than the women for the knee flexors and extensors (P < 0.001). These results would indicate that, although the difference between sexes in muscle CSA is smaller in the thigh than in the upper arm, differences in the ability to develop dynamic strength proportional to the CSA appeared mainly in the thigh muscles compared to the upper muscles.

Key words

Cross-sectional area Isokinetic strength Sex differences Ultrasound 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alway SE, Grumbt WH, Gonyea WJ, Stray-Gundersen J (1989) Contrasts in muscle and myofibers of elite male and female bodybuilders. J Appl Physiol 67:24–31Google Scholar
  2. Alway SE, Stray-Gunderson J, Grumbt WH, Gonyea J (1990) Muscle cross-sectional area and torque in resistance-trained subjects. Eur J Appl Physiol 60:86–90Google Scholar
  3. Belanger AY, McComas A (1981) Extent of motor unit activation during effort. J Appl Physiol Respir Environ Exerc Physiol 51:1131–1135Google Scholar
  4. Bellemare F, Woods JJ, Hohansson R, Bigland-Ritchie B (1983) Motor-unit discharge rates in maximal voluntary contractions of three human muscles. Neurophysiol 50:138–139Google Scholar
  5. Bishop P, Cureton K, Collins M (1987) Sex difference in muscular strength in equally-trained men and women. Ergonomics 30:675–687Google Scholar
  6. Cureton KJ, Collins MA, Hill DW, Mcelhannon FM Jr (1988) Muscle hypertrophy in men and women. Med Sci Sports Exerc 20:338–344Google Scholar
  7. Davies J, Parker DF, Rutherford OM, Jones DA (1988) Changes in strength and cross-sectional area of the elbow flexors as a result of isometric strength training. Eur J Appl Physiol 57:667–670Google Scholar
  8. Fukunaga T, Roy RR, Shellock PG, Hodgson JA, Lee PL, Kwong-Fu K, Edgerton DR (1992) Physiological cross-sectional area of human leg muscles based on magnetic resonance imaging. J Orthop Res 10:926–934Google Scholar
  9. Hakkinen K (1993) Neuromuscular fatigue and recovery in male and female athletes during heavy resistance exercise. Int J Sports Med 14:53–59Google Scholar
  10. Hoffman T, Stauffer RW, Jackson AS (1979) Sex difference in strength. Am J Sports Med 7:265–267Google Scholar
  11. Holloway JB, Baechle TR (1990) Strength training for females athletes. A review of selected aspects. Sports Med 9:216–228Google Scholar
  12. Hosler WW, Morrow JR (1982) Arm and leg strength compared between young women and mean after allowing for difference in body size and composition. Ergonomics 25:309–313Google Scholar
  13. Ikai M, Fukunaga T (1968) Calculation of muscle strength per unit cross-sectional area of human muscle by means of ultrasonic measurement. Int Z angew Physiol 26:26–32Google Scholar
  14. Kanehisa H, Tsunoda N, Ikegawa S, Fukunaga T (1987) Muscle strength of Japanese female athletes in relation to cross-sectional area of muscle. In: Jonsson B (ed), Biomechanics X-A. Human Kinetics, Campaign Ill., pp 523–527Google Scholar
  15. Kobryn U, Hoffmann B (1983) Physiological effects of dynamic hand work in subjects of different age and sex. Eur J Appl Physiol 51:145–154Google Scholar
  16. Komi PV (1986) Training of muscle strength and power: interaction of neuromotoric, hypertrophic and mechanical factors. Int J Sports Med [Suppl] 7:10–15Google Scholar
  17. Laubach LL (1976) Comparative muscular strength of men and women: a review of the literature. Aviat Space Environ Med 47:534–542Google Scholar
  18. Maughan RJ, Watson JS, Weir J (1983) Strength and cross-sectional area of human skeletal muscle. J Physiol 338:37–49Google Scholar
  19. Maughan RJ, Watson JS, Weir J (1984) The relative proportions of fat, muscle and bone in the normal human forearm as determined by computed tomography. Clin Sci 66:683–689Google Scholar
  20. Maughan RJ, Harmon M, Leiper JB, Sale D, Delman A (1986) Endurance capacity of untrained males and females in isometric and dynamic contractions. Eur J Appl Physiol 55:395–400Google Scholar
  21. Nordgren B (1972) Anthropometric measures and muscle strength in young men. Scand J Rehabil Med 4:165–169Google Scholar
  22. Nygaard E, Houston M, Suzuki Y, Jorgensen K, Saltin B (1983) Morphology of the brachial biceps muscle and elbow flexion in man. Acta Physiol Scand 117:287–292Google Scholar
  23. Rutherford OM, Jones DA (1986) The role of learning and coordination in strength training. Eur J Appl Physiol 55:100–105Google Scholar
  24. Rutherford OM, Jones DA, Newham DJ (1986) Clinical and experimental application of the percutaneous twitch superimposition technique for the study of human muscle activation. J neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 49:1288–1291Google Scholar
  25. Ryushi T, Fukunaga T (1986) Influence of subtype of fast twitch fibers on isokinetic strength in untrained men. Int J Sports Med 7:250–253Google Scholar
  26. Ryushi T, Hakkinen K, Kauhanen H, Komi PV (1988) Muscle fiber characteristics, muscle cross-sectional area and force production in strength athletes, physically active males and females. Scand J Sports Sci 10:7–15Google Scholar
  27. Sale DG, MacDougall JD, Alway SE, Sutton JR (1987) Voluntary strength and muscle characteristics in untrained men and women and male bodybuilders. J Appl Physiol 62:1786–1793Google Scholar
  28. Schantz P, Randall-Fox E, Hutchison W, Tyden A, Astrand PO (1983) Muscle fiber type distribution, muscle cross-sectional area and maximal voluntary strength in humans. Acta Physiol Scand 117:219–226Google Scholar
  29. Singh M, Karpovich PV (1968) Strength of forearm flexors and extensors in men and women. J Appl Physiol 25:177–180Google Scholar
  30. Tanner JM, Hughes PCR, Whitehouse RH (1981) Radiographically determined widths of bones, muscle and fat in the upper arm and calf from age 3–18 years. Ann Hum Biol 8:495–517Google Scholar
  31. Vandervoort AA, McComas AJ (1986) Contractile changes in opposing muscles of the human ankle joints with aging. J Appl Physiol 61:361–367Google Scholar
  32. Wilmore JH (1974) Alterations in strength, body composition and anthropometric measurements consequent to a 10-week weight training program. Med Sci Sports Exerc 16:133–138Google Scholar
  33. Wilmore JH, Parr RB, Girandola RN, Ward P, Vodak PA, Barstow TJ, Pipes TV, Romero GT, Leslie P (1978) Physiological alterations consequent to circuit weight training. Med Sci Sports Exerc 10:79–84Google Scholar
  34. Young A, Stokes M, Crowe M (1985) The size and strength of the quadriceps muscles of old and young men. Clin Physiol 5:145–154Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Kanehisa
    • 1
  • S. Ikegawa
    • 2
  • T. Fukunaga
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of EducationUniversity of ToyamaToyama, ToyamaJapan
  2. 2.Sports Sciences LaboratoryJapan Women's UniversityBunkyo, TokyoJapan
  3. 3.Department of Sports SciencesUniversity of TokyoMeguro, TokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations