Skip to main content

Novel insights on the bottom–up rise strength transfer: investigating massed vs. distributed exercise training



The purpose of this study is to investigate the Bottom–Up Rise Strength Transfer (BURST) induced by massed vs. distributed-rehabilitative exercise training.


Participants were randomly allocated to one of the 12 weeks massed (MRT) vs. distributed-(DRT) rehabilitative exercise training (performing lower limb proprioceptive, balance, agility, and resistance exercise) group or no-intervention group (Control). The upper and lower limb strength assessment was recorded at baseline (pre), 8 weeks (mid), and 12 weeks (post).


The net right hand MVC force increased after 12 weeks of DRT (58.3%). The net left hand MVC force increased after 12 weeks of both DRT and MRT (44.0% & 33.9% respectively). The BURST effect induced by DRT was significantly larger than MRT (in right hand: 45.1% & in left hand 33.4%).


This is the first study investigating in a between-subject design the BURST effect of massed vs. distributed-rehabilitative training. The result showed middle-aged women can develop their upper limbs strength by performing both the DRT and MRT in their lower limbs. Lower body distributed resistance training, however, can provide a significantly greater stimulus for increasing the BURST in middle-aged women.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, MS, upon reasonable request.


  1. Hellebrandt FA (1951) Cross education: ipsilateral and contralateral effects of unimanual training. J Appl Physiol 4(2):136–144

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hortobágyi T, LAMBERT NJ, HILL JP (1997) Greater cross education following training with muscle lengthening than shortening. Med Sci Sports Exerc 29(1):107–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bartolomei S et al (2018) Effect of lower-body resistance training on upper-body strength adaptation in trained men. J Strength Cond Res 32(1):13–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Murray SR, Udermann BE (2003) Massed versus distributed practice: which is better? CAHPERD J 28(1):4

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hosseinzadeh M et al (2015) Ipsilateral resistance exercise prevents exercise-induced central sensitization in the contralateral limb: a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Appl Physiol 115(11):2253–2262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Carroll TJ, Riek S, Carson RG (2001) Neural adaptations to resistance training: implications for movement control. Sports Med 31(12):829–840

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Madarame H et al (2008) Cross-transfer effects of resistance training with blood flow restriction. Med Sci Sports Exerc 40(2):258–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hansen S et al (2001) The effect of short-term strength training on human skeletal muscle: the importance of physiologically elevated hormone levels. Scand J Med Sci Sports 11(6):347–354

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Pietrangelo T et al (2018) The bottom-up rise strength transfer in elderly after endurance and resistance training: the BURST. Front Physiol 9:1944

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Shea CH et al (2000) Spacing practice sessions across days benefits the learning of motor skills. Hum Mov Sci 19(5):737–760

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Trimac M (2007) Acquisition and performance of sport skills. Translated by Rasool Hemayat Talab and Abdollah Ghasemi. Bamdad Ketab, Tehran

  12. Ahmadvand R, Kiani SMA, Shojae M (2016) The effect of mass & distributed practice on performance and learning of discrete simple and complex skills in volleyball. Turkish J Kinesiol 2(3):49–55

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ceci R et al (2020) Endurance training improves plasma superoxide dismutase activity in healthy elderly. Mech Ageing Dev 185:111190

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Beyer KS et al (2016) Short-term unilateral resistance training results in cross education of strength without changes in muscle size, activation, or endocrine response. J Strength Cond Res 30(5):1213–1223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Green LA, Gabriel DA (2018) The cross education of strength and skill following unilateral strength training in the upper and lower limbs. J Neurophysiol 120(2):468–479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ben Othman A, Behm DG, Chaouachi A (2018) Evidence of homologous and heterologous effects after unilateral leg training in youth. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 43(3):282–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Chaouachi A et al (2019) Global training effects of trained and untrained muscles with youth can be maintained during 4 weeks of detraining. J Strength Cond Res 33(10):2788–2800

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Verhoeven FM, Newell KM (2018) Unifying practice schedules in the timescales of motor learning and performance. Hum Mov Sci 59:153–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Barss TS, Pearcey GE, Zehr EP (2016) Cross-education of strength and skill: an old idea with applications in the aging nervous system. Yale J Biol Med 89(1):81–86

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Benelli P et al (2007) Assessment of post-competition peak blood lactate in male and female master swimmers aged 40–79 years and its relationship with swimming performance. Eur J Appl Physiol 99(6):685–693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Nelson ME et al (2007) Physical activity and public health in older adults: recommendation from the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Circulation 116(9):1094–1105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Carroll TJ et al (2006) Contralateral effects of unilateral strength training: evidence and possible mechanisms. J Appl Physiol 101(5):1514–1522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Manca A et al (2015) A comprehensive assessment of the cross-training effect in ankle dorsiflexors of healthy subjects: A randomized controlled study. Gait Posture 42(1):1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Uh BS et al (2000) The benefit of a single-leg strength training program for the muscles around the untrained ankle. Am J Sports Med 28(4):568–573

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ebersole KT et al (2002) Mechanomyographic and electromyographic responses to unilateral isometric training. J Strength Cond Res 16(2):192–201

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Brown, T.G., The intrinsic factors in the act of progression in the mammal. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B, containing papers of a biological character, 1911. 84(572): p. 308–319.

  27. Orlovsky T et al (1999) Neuronal control of locomotion: from mollusc to man. Oxford University Press, Oxford

  28. Dempster FN (1996) Distributing and managing the conditions of encoding and practice. Memory. Elsevier, pp 317–344

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Edwards AS (1917) The Distribution of Time in Learning Small Amounts of Material. In Colleagues and former students of Edward Bradford Titchener, Studies in psychology contributed by colleagues and former students of Edward Bradford Titchener (pp. 209–213). Louis N Wilson

  30. Krishnan C (2019) Learning and interlimb transfer of new gait patterns are facilitated by distributed practice across days. Gait Posture 70:84–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Aagaard P et al (2000) Neural inhibition during maximal eccntric and concentric quadriceps contraction: effects of resistance training. J Appl Ph 89(6):2249–2257

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Galea JM, Miall RC, Woolley DG (2007) Asymmetric interlimb transfer of concurrent adaptation to opposing dynamic forces. Exp Brain Res 182(2):267–273

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Banala SK et al (2009) Robot assisted gait training with active leg exoskeleton (ALEX). IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 17(1):2–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Schmidt RA (2011) English motor control and learning: a behavioral emphasis. Human Kinetics, Inc.

  35. Valacchi G et al (2018) OxInflammation: from subclinical condition to pathological biomarker. Front Physiol 9:858

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Hendy AM, Lamon S (2017) The cross-education phenomenon: brain and beyond. Front Physiol 8:297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Zehr EP (2005) Neural control of rhythmic human movement: the common core hypothesis. Exerc Sport Sci Rev 33(1):54–60

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Sardroodian M et al (2015) Freely chosen stride frequencies during walking and running are not correlated with freely chosen pedalling frequency and are insensitive to strength training. Gait Posture 42(1):60–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Frigon A, Collins DF, Zehr EP (2004) Effect of rhythmic arm movement on reflexes in the legs: modulation of soleus H-reflexes and somatosensory conditioning. J Neurophysiol 91(4):1516–1523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Zehr EP et al (2007) Neural regulation of rhythmic arm and leg movement is conserved across human locomotor tasks. J Physiol 582(Pt 1):209–227

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Frigon A (2017) The neural control of interlimb coordination during mammalian locomotion. J Neurophysiol 117(6):2224–2241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. de Kam D et al (2013) Arm movements can increase leg muscle activity during submaximal recumbent stepping in neurologically intact individuals. J Appl Physiol 115(1):34–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Frazer AK et al (2018) Determining the potential sites of neural adaptation to cross-education: implications for the cross-education of muscle strength. Eur J Appl Physiol 118(9):1751–1772

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Rogers MW et al (2012) Efficacy of home-based kinesthesia, balance & agility exercise training among persons with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis. J Sports Sci Med 11(4):751–758

Download references


Authors thank the participants of the investigation for their commitment and dedication to their training program.


No financial or material support of any kind was received for the work described in this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



MS, MSA, MH, and NN conceived and designed research. MS and MSA conducted experiments. MS and MH, DB, and TP analyzed and interpreted the data. MS, MH, DB, and TP wrote the manuscript. All authors read and approved the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mahta Sardroodian.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The author(s) have no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

Ethics approval

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors after approval by the Ethics Committee in Research of Sport Science Research Institute of Iran (1399.014).

Consent to participate

Participants were informed of the benefits and risks of the investigation before signing an institutionally approved informed consent document to participate in the study.

Consent for publication

All the authors hereby give their consent for publication in Sport sciences for health.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOC 34 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aman, M.S., Hosseinzadeh, M., Nokhodchi, N. et al. Novel insights on the bottom–up rise strength transfer: investigating massed vs. distributed exercise training. Sport Sci Health 18, 329–339 (2022).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:


  • Cross transfer
  • Cross-talk
  • Neuromuscular
  • Resistance training
  • Aging rehabilitation
  • Exercise physiology