Sports Medicine

, Volume 36, Issue 2, pp 133–149 | Cite as

Neural Adaptations to Resistive Exercise

Mechanisms and Recommendations for Training Practices
Review Article

Abstract

It is generally accepted that neural factors play an important role in muscle strength gains. This article reviews the neural adaptations in strength, with the goal of laying the foundations for practical applications in sports medicine and rehabilitation.

An increase in muscular strength without noticeable hypertrophy is the first line of evidence for neural involvement in acquisition of muscular strength. The use of surface electromyographic (SEMG) techniques reveal that strength gains in the early phase of a training regimen are associated with an increase in the amplitude of SEMG activity. This has been interpreted as an increase in neural drive, which denotes the magnitude of efferent neural output from the CNS to active muscle fibres. However, SEMG activity is a global measure of muscle activity. Underlying alterations in SEMG activity are changes in motor unit firing patterns as measured by indwelling (wire or needle) electrodes. Some studies have reported a transient increase in motor unit firing rate. Training-related increases in the rate of tension development have also been linked with an increased probability of doublet firing in individual motor units. A doublet is a very short interspike interval in a motor unit train, and usually occurs at the onset of a muscular contraction. Motor unit synchronisation is another possible mechanism for increases in muscle strength, but has yet to be definitely demonstrated.

There are several lines of evidence for central control of training-related adaptation to resistive exercise. Mental practice using imagined contractions has been shown to increase the excitability of the cortical areas involved in movement and motion planning. However, training using imagined contractions is unlikely to be as effective as physical training, and it may be more applicable to rehabilitation.

Retention of strength gains after dissipation of physiological effects demonstrates a strong practice effect. Bilateral contractions are associated with lower SEMG and strength compared with unilateral contractions of the same muscle group. SEMG magnitude is lower for eccentric contractions than for concentric contractions. However, resistive training can reverse these trends. The last line of evidence presented involves the notion that unilateral resistive exercise of a specific limb will also result in training effects in the unexercised contralateral limb (cross-transfer or cross-education). Peripheral involvement in training-related strength increases is much more uncertain. Changes in the sensory receptors (i.e. Golgi tendon organs) may lead to disinhibition and an increased expression of muscular force.

Agonist muscle activity results in limb movement in the desired direction, while antagonist activity opposes that motion. Both decreases and increases in co-activation of the antagonist have been demonstrated. A reduction in antagonist co-activation would allow increased expression of agonist muscle force, while an increase in antagonist co-activation is important for maintaining the integrity of the joint. Thus far, it is not clear what the CNS will optimise: force production or joint integrity.

The following recommendations are made by the authors based on the existing literature. Motor learning theory and imagined contractions should be incorporated into strength-training practice. Static contractions at greater muscle lengths will transfer across more joint angles. Submaximal eccentric contractions should be used when there are issues of muscle pain, detraining or limb immobilisation. The reversal of antagonists (antagonist-to-agonist) proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation contraction pattern would be useful to increase the rate of tension development in older adults, thus serving as an important prophylactic in preventing falls. When evaluating the neural changes induced by strength training using EMG recording, antagonist EMG activity should always be measured and evaluated.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Widrick J, Stelzer J, Shoepe T, et al. Functional properties of human muscle fibers after short-term resistance exercise training. Am J Physiol 2002; 283: R408–R416Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rich C, Cafarelli E. Submaximal motor unit firing rates after 8 wk of isometric resistance training. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000; 32: 190–196PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Narici MV, Hoppeler H, Kayser B, et al. Human quadriceps cross-sectional area, torque and neural activation during 6 month strength training. Acta Physiol Scand 1996; 157: 175–186CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aagaard P. Training-induced changes in neural function. Exerc Sports Sci Rev 2003; 31: 61–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carroll TJ, Riek S, Carson RG. The sites of neural adaptation induced by resistance training in humans. J Physiol 2002; 544: 641–652CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Duchateau J, Enoka R. Neural adaptations with chronic activity patterns in able-bodied humans. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2002; 81 (11 Suppl.): S17–S27CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Moritani T. Neuromuscular adaptations during the acquisition of muscle strength, power and motor tasks. J Biomech 1993; 26 Suppl. 1: 95–107CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Phillips SM. Short-term training: when do repeated bouts of resistance exercise become training. Can J Appl Physiol 2000; 25: 185–193CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Akima H, Takahashi H, Kuno SY, et al. Early phase adaptations of muscle use and strength to isokinetic training. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1999; 31: 588–594CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hickson RC, Hidaka K, Foster C, et al. Successive time courses of strength development and steroid hormone responses to heavy-resistance training. J Appl Physiol 1994; 76: 663–670PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Narici MV, Roi GS, Landoni L, et al. Changes in force, cross-sectional area and neural activation during strength training and detraining of the human quadriceps. Eur J Appl Physiol 1989; 59: 310–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moritani T, deVries HA. Neural factors versus hypertrophy in the time-course of muscle strength gain. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1979; 58: 115–130Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Staron RS, Karapondo DL, Kraemer WJ, et al. Skeletal muscle adaptations during early phase of heavy-resistance training in men and women. J Appl Physiol 1994; 76: 1247–1255PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kamen G. The acquisition of maximal isometric plantar flexor strength: a force-time curve analysis. J Motor Behav 1983; 15: 63–73Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hood LB, Forward EM. Strength variations in two determinations of maximal isometric contractions. Phys Ther 1965; 45: 1046–1053PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schenck JM, Forward EM. Quantitative strength changes with test repetitions. J Am Phys Ther Assoc 1965; 45: 562–569Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kroll W. Reliability variations of strength in test-retest situations. Res Q Exerc Sport 1963; 34: 50–55Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gabriel DA, Basford J, An K-N. Effects of the reversal of antagonists upon isometric elbow extension strength and endurance. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1997; 78: 1191–1195CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Patten C, Kamen G, Rowland DM. Adaptations in maximal motor unit discharge rate to strength training in young and older adults. Muscle Nerve 2001; 24: 542–550CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kamen G, Sison SV, Du CC, et al. Motor unit discharge behavior in older adults during maximal-effort contractions. J Appl Physiol 1995; 79: 1908–1913PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Deschenes M, Judelson D, Kraemer W, et al. Effects of resistance training on neuromuscular junction morphology. Muscle Nerve 2000; 23: 1576–1581CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gorassini M, Yang J, Siu M, et al. Intrinsic activation of human motoneurons: reduction of motor unit recruitment thresholds by repeated contractions. J Neurophysiol 2002; 87: 1859–1866PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Karelis A, Marcil M, Perronet F, et al. Effect of lactate infusion on M-wave characteristics and force in rat plantaris muscle during repeated stimulation in situ. J Appl Physiol 2004; 96: 2133–2138CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Aagaard P, Simonsen EB, Andersen JL, et al. Neural inhibition during maximal eccentric and concentric quadriceps contraction: effects of resistance. J Appl Physiol 2000b; 89: 2249–2257PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Aagaard P, Simonsen EB, Andersen JL, et al. Neural adaptations to resistance training: changes in evoked V-wave and H-reflexes. J Appl Physiol 2001; 92: 2309–2318Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Aagaard P, Simonsen EB, Andersen JL, et al. Increased rate of force development and neural drive of human skeletal muscle following resistance exercise. J Appl Physiol 2002; 93: 1318–1326PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Häkkinen K, Alen M, Kallinen M, et al. Neuromuscular adaptation during prolonged strength training, detraining and re-strength-training in middle-aged and elderly people. Eur J Appl Physiol 2000; 83: 51–62CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Häkkinen K, Kallinen M, Izquierdo M, et al. Changes in agonist-antagonist EMG, muscle CSA, and force during strength training in middle-aged and older people. J Appl Physiol 1998; 84: 1341–1349PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Häkkinen K, Komi PV. Electromyographic changes during strength training and detraining. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1983; 15: 455–460PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hortobágyi T, Hill IP, Houmard JA, et al. Adaptive responses to muscle lengthening and shortening in humans. J Appl Physiol 1996; 80: 765–772PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hortobágyi T, Lambert NJ, Hill IP. Greater cross education following training with muscle lengthening than shortening. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1997; 29: 107–112PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hortobágyi T, Scott K, Lambert J, et al. Cross-education of muscle strength is greater with stimulated than voluntary contractions. Motor Control 1999; 3: 205–219PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Garfinkel S, Cafarelli E. Relative changes in maximal force, EMG, and muscle cross-sectional area after isometric training. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1992; 24: 1220–1227PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Thorstensson A, Karlsson AJ, Viitasalo JHT, et al. Effect of strength training on EMG of human skeletal muscle. Acta Physiol Scand 1976; 98: 232–236CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Duchateau J, Hainaut K. Electrical and mechanical changes in immobilized human muscle. J Appl Physiol 1987; 62: 2168–2173PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Duchateau J, Hainaut K. Effects of immobilization on electromyogram power spectrum changes during fatigue. Eur J Appl Physiol 1991; 63: 458–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Rosemeyer B, Sturz H. Muscles of the leg during immobilization: an electromyographic study. Arch Orthop Unfallchir 1977; 90: 299–313CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wolf E, Magora A, Gonen B. Disuse atrophy of the quadriceps muscle. Electromyography 1971; 11: 479–490PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Edgerton VR, Barnard RJ, Peter IB, et al. Properties of immobilized hind-limb muscles of the Galago senegalensis. Exp Neurol 1975; 46: 115–131CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Alméras N, Lemieux S, Bouchard C, et al. Fat gain in female swimmers. Physiol Behav 1997; 61: 811–817CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Järvinen TAH, Józsa L, Kannus P, et al. Organization and distribution of intramuscular connective tissue in normal and immobilized skeletal muscle: an immunohistochemical polarization and scanning electron microscopic study. J Muscle Res Cell Motil 2002; 23: 245–254CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Gabriel DA, Kroll WP. Isometric successive induction resistance exercise. Clin Kinesiol 1991; 45: 30–37Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Gabriel DA, Basford J, An K-N. Neural adaptations to fatigue: Implications for muscle strength and training. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001; 33: 1354–1360CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kroll W. The 1981 CH McCloy Research Lecture: analysis of local muscular fatigue patterns. Res Q Exerc Sport 1981; 52: 523–539CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Dowling JJ, Konert E, Ljucovic P, et al. Are humans able to voluntarily elicit maximum muscle force? Neurosci Lett 1994; 179: 25–28CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Gandevia S. Spinal and supraspinal factors in human muscle fatigue. Physiol Rev 2001; 81: 1725–1789PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Knight CA, Kamen G. Adaptations in muscular activation of the knee extensor muscles with strength training in young and older adults. J Bectromyogr Kinesiol 2001; 11: 405–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Kamen G, Knight CA. Training-related adaptations in motor unit discharge rate in young and older adults. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2004; 59: 1334–1338CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Van Cutsem M, Duchateau J, Hainaut K. Changes in single motor unit behaviour contribute to the increase in contraction speed after dynamic training in humans. J Physiol 1998; 513: 295–305CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Carolan B, Cafarelli E. Adaptations after isometric resistance training. J Appl Physiol 1992; 73: 911–917PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Clamann HP, Schelhorn TB. Nonlinear force addition of newly recruited motor units in the cat hindlimb. Muscle Nerve 1988; 11: 1079–1089CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Milner-Brown HS, Stein RB, Lee RG. Synchronization of human motor units: possible roles of exercise and supraspinal reflexes. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1975; 38: 245–254CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Yue G, Fuglevand AJ, Nordstrom MA, et al. Limitations of the surface electromyography technique for estimating motor unit synchronization. Biol Cybern 1995; 73: 223–233CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Semmler JG, Nordstrom M. Motor unit discharge and force tremor in skill- and strength-trained individuals. Exp Brain Res 1998; 119: 27–38CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Ginet J, Guiheneuc P, Prevot M, et al. Étude comparative du recrutement de la reponse reflexe monosynaptique du soleaire (reflexe H) chez des sujets non entraines et chez des sportifs. Med Sport 1975; 49: 66–72Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Schieppati M. The Hoffmann reflex: a means of assessing spinal reflex excitability and its descending control in man. Prog Neurobiol 1987; 28: 345–376CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Carp JS, Wolpaw JR. Motoneuron properties after operantly conditioned increase in primate H-reflex. J Neurophysiol 1995; 73: 1365–1373PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Wolf SL, Segal RL, Heter ND, et al. Contralateral and long latency effects of human biceps brachii stretch reflex conditioning. Exp Brain Res 1995; 107: 96–102CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Trimble MH, Koceja DM. Effect of a reduced base of support in standing and balance training on the soleus H-reflex. Int J Neurosci 2001; 106: 1–20CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Koceja DM, Kamen G. Conditioned patellar tendon reflexes in sprint- and endurance-trained athletes. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1988; 20: 172–177CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Yamanaka K, Yamamoto S, Nakazawa K, et al. Effects of long-term bed rest on H-reflex and motor evoked potential in lower leg muscles during standing. J Gravit Physiol 1999; 6: 157–158Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Capaday C, Stein RB. Difference in the amplitude of the human soleus H reflex during walking and running. J Physiol 1987; 392: 513–522PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Yang JF, Whelan PJ. Neural mechanisms that contribute to cyclical modulation of the soleus H-reflex in walking in humans. Exp Brain Res 1993; 95: 547–556CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Katz R, Pierrot-Deseilligny E. Recurrent inhibition in humans. Prog Neurobiol 1998; 57: 325–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Earles DR, Morris HH, Peng CY, et al. Assessment of motoneuron excitability using recurrent inhibition and paired reflex depression protocols: a test of reliability. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 2002; 42: 159–166PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Casabona A, Polizzi MC, Perciavalle V. Differences in H-reflex between athletes trained for explosive contractions and non-trained subjects. Eur J Appl Physiol 1990; 61: 26–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Koceja DM, Burke JR, Kamen G. Organization of segmental reflexes in trained dancers. Int J Sports Med 1991; 12: 285–289CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Maffiuletti NA, Martin A, Babault N, et al. Electrical and mechanical Hmax-to-Mmax ratio in power- and endurance-trained athletes. J Appl Physiol 2001; 90: 3–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Rochcongar P, Dassonville J, Le Bars R. Modification of the Hoffmann reflex in function of athletic training [in French]. Eur J Appl Physiol 1979; 40: 165–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Sale DG, MacDougall JD, Upton AM, et al. Effect of strength training upon motoneuron excitability in man. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1983; 15: 57–62PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Zehr P. Considerations for use of the Hoffman reflex in exercise studies. Eur J Appl Physiol 2002; 86: 455–468CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Beaumont E, Gardiner P. Effects of daily spontaneous running on the electrophysiological properties of hindlimb motoneurons in rats. J Physiol 2002; 540 (1): 129–138CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Upton AR, Radford PR Motoneurone excitability in elite sprinters. In: Komi P, editor. Biomechanics V-A. Baltimore (MD): University Park Press, 1975: 82–87Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Upton AR, McComas AJ, Sica RE. Potentiation of ‘late’ responses evoked in muscles during effort. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1971; 34: 699–711CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    April RS, Spencer WA. Enhanced synaptic effectiveness following prolonged changes in synaptic use. Experientia 1969; 25: 1272–1273CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Gerchman LB, Edgerton VR, Carrow RE. Effects of physical training on the histochemistry and morphology of ventral motor neurons. Exp Neurol 1975; 49: 790–801CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Gilliam TB, Roy RR, Taylor JF, et al. Ventral motor neuron alterations in rat spinal cord after chronic exercise. Experientia 1977; 33: 665–667CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Edds MJ. Hypertrophy of nerve fibers to functionally overloaded muscles. J Comp Neurol 1950; 93: 259–275CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Eisen AA, Carpenter S, Karpati G, et al. The effect of muscle hyper- and hypoactivity upon fibre diameters of intact and regenerating nerves. J Neurol Sci 1973; 20: 457–469CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Tomanek RJ, Tipton CM. Influence of exercise and tenectomy on the morphology of a muscle nerve. Anat Rec 1967; 159: 105–113CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Kamen G, Taylor P, Beehler PJ. Ulnar and posterior tibial nerve conduction velocity in athletes. Int J Sports Med 1984; 5: 26–30CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Scaglioni GA, Ferri AE, Minetti A, et al. Plantar flexor activation capacity and H reflex in older adults: adaptations to strength training. J Appl Physiol 2002; 92: 2292–2302PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Voigt M, Chelli F, Frigo C. Changes in the excitability of soleus muscle short latency stretch reflexes during human hopping after 4 week of hopping training. Eur J Appl Physiol 1998; 78: 522–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Fadiga L, Buccina G, Craighero L, et al. Corticospinal excitability is specifically modulated by motor imagery: a magnetic stimulation study. Neuropsychologia 1999; 37: 147–158CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Hashimoto R, Rothwell JC. Dynamic changes in corticospinal excitability during motor imagery. Exp Brain Res 1999; 125: 75–81CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Nair DG, Purcott KL, Fuchs A, et al. Cortical and cerebellar activity of the human brain during imagined and executed unimanual and bimanual action sequences: a functional MRI study. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res 2003; 15: 250–260CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Romero DH, Lacourse MG, Lawrence KE, et al. Event-related potentials as a function of movement parameter variations during motor imagery and isometric action. Behav Brain Res 2000; 117: 83–96CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Williamson JW, McColl R, Mathews D, et al. Brain activation by central command during actual and imagined handgrip under hypnosis. J Appl Physiol 2002; 92: 1317–1324CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Ranganathan VK, Siemionow V, Liu JZ, et al. From mental power to muscle power: gaining strength by using the mind. Neuropsychologia 2004; 42: 944–956CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Bowers L. Effects of autosuggested muscle contractions on muscular strength and size. Res Q Exerc Sport 1966; 37: 302–312Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Yue G, Cole KJ. Strength increases from the motor program: comparison of training with maximal voluntary and imagined muscle contractions. J Neurophysiol 1992; 67: 1114–1123PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Herbert RD, Dean C, Gandevia SC. Effects of real and imagined training on voluntary muscle activation during maximal isometric contractions. Acta Physiol Scand 1998; 163: 361–368CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Van Dieën JH, Ogita F, Haan A. Reduced neural drive in bilateral exertions: a performance4imited factor. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2003; 35: 111–118CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Howard ID, Enoka RM. Maximum bilateral contractions are modified by neurally mediated interlimb effects. J Appl Physiol 1991; 70: 306–316PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Taniguchi Y. Relationship between modifications of bilateral deficit in upper and lower limb by resistance training. Eur J Appl Physiol 1998; 78: 226–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Morris AF. Myotatic reflex effects on bilateral reciprocal leg strength. Am Correct Ther J 1974; 28: 24–29PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Lagassé PP. Muscle strength: ipsilateral and contralateral effects of superimposed stretch. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1974; 55: 305–310PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Schantz PG, Moritani T, Karlson E, et al. Maximal voluntary force of bilateral and unilateral leg extension. Acta Physiol Scand 1989; 136: 185–192CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Scripture EW, Smith TL, Brown EM. On the education of muscular control and power. Studies from the Yale Psychological Laboratories 1894; 2: 114–119Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Fay T. The use of pathological and unlocking reflexes in the rehabilitation of spastics. Am J Phys Med 1954; 33: 347–352PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Hellebrandt FA, Houtz SJ, Euband RN. Influence of alternate and reciprocal exercise on work capacity. Arch Neurol 1951; 32: 766–776Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Shields RK, Leo KC, Messaros AJ, et al. Effects of repetitive handgrip training on endurance, specificity, and cross-education. Phys Ther 1999; 5: 467–475Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Kannus P, Alosa D, Cook L, et al. Effect of one-legged exercise on the strength, power and endurance of the contralateral leg: a randomized, controlled study using isometric and concentric isokinetic training. Eur J Appl Physiol 1992; 64: 117–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Zhou S. Chronic neural adaptations to unilateral exercise: mechanisms of cross education. Exerc Sport Sci Rev 2000; 28: 177–184PubMedGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Shima N, Ishida K, Katayama K, et al. Cross-education of muscular strength during unilateral resistance training and detraining. Eur J Appl Physiol 2002; 86: 287–294CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Meyers CR. Effects of two isometric routines on strength, size, and endurance in exercised and non-exercised arms. Res Q Exerc Sport 1967; 38: 430–440Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Rasch PJ, Morehouse LE. Effect of static and dynamic exercise on muscular strength and hypertrophy. J Appl Physiol 1957; 11: 29–34PubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Anson MR, Halpern AA, Clarkson PM. Pulsed eccentric loading effects on cross-education. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1993; 25 Suppl.: S164Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Clarkson PM, Dedrick ME. Exercise-induced muscle damage, repair, and adaptation in old and young subjects. J Gerontol 1988; 43: M91–M96CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Dedrick ME, Clarkson PM. The effects of eccentric exercise on motor performance in young and older women. Eur J Appl Physiol 1990; 60: 183–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Houston ME, Froese EA, Valeriote SP, et al. Muscle performance, morphology and metabolic capacity during strength training and detraining: a one leg model. Eur J Appl Physiol 1983; 51: 25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Chen R, Cohen LG, Hallett M. Role of the ipsilateral motor cortex in voluntary movement. Can J Neurol Sci 1997; 24: 284–291PubMedGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Kristeva R, Cheyne D, Deecke L. Neuromagnetic fields accompanying unilateral and bilateral voluntary movements: topography and analysis of cortical sources. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1991; 81: 284–298CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Robinson KL, Mcllwain JS, Hayes KC. Effects of H-reflex conditioning upon the contralateral alpha motoneuron pool. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1979; 46: 65–71CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Enoka RM. Neural adaptations with chronic physical activity. J Biomech 1997; 30: 447–455CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Sale DG. Neural adaptations to resistance training. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1988; 20Suppl.: S135–S145CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Kamper DG, Rymer WZ. Impairment of voluntary control of finger motion following stroke: role of inappropriate muscle coactivation. Muscle Nerve 2001; 24: 673–681CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Lindscheid RL. The thumb axis joint: a biomechanical model. In: Stricklan J, editor. Difficult problems in hand surgery. St Louis (MO): CV Mosby, 1982: 169–172Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Solomon ow M, Baratta R, Zhou BH, et al. Electro myogram coactivation patterns of the elbow antagonist muscles during slow isokinetic movement. Exp Neurol 1988; 100: 470–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Baratta R, Solomonow M, Zhou BH, et al. The role of antagonist musculature in maintaining knee stability. Am J Sports Med 1988; 16: 113–122CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Gabriel DA, Boucher IP. Practicing a maximal performance task: a cooperative strategy for muscle activity. Res Q Exerc Sport 2000; 71: 217–228CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Lindquist EF. Design and analysis of experiments in psychology and education. Boston (MA): Houghton Mifflin, 1953Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Dowling JJ. Use of electromyography for the noninvasive prediction of muscle forces. Sports Med 1997; 24: 82–96CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Colson S, Pousson M, Martin A, et al. Isokinetic elbow flexion and coactivation following eccentric training. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 1999; 9: 13–20CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Rutherford OM, Purcell C, Newham DJ. The human force-velocity relationship: activity in the knee flexor and extensor muscles before and after eccentric practice. Eur J Appl Physiol 2001; 84: 133–140CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Macaluso A, Nimmo MA, Foster IE, et al. Contractile muscle volume and agonist-antagonist coactivation account for differences in torque between young and older adults. Muscle Nerve 2002; 26: 858–863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Yang JL, Winter DA. Electromyographic reliability in maximal and submaximal isometric contractions. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1983; 64: 417–420PubMedGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Finucane SDG, Rafeei T, Kues J, et al. Reproducibility of electromyographic recordings of submaximal concentric and eccentric muscle contractions in humans. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1998; 109: 290–296CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Barr AE, Goldsheyder D, Özkaya N, et al. Testing apparatus and experimental procedure for position specific normalization of electromyographic measurements of distal upper extremity musculature. Clin Biomech 2001; 16: 576–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Gabriel DA. Reliability of SEMG spike parameters during concentric contractions. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 2000; 40: 423–430PubMedGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Kollmitzer J, Ebenbichler GR, Kopf A. Reliability of surface electromyographic measurements. Clin Neurophysiol 1999; 110: 725–734CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Rainoldi A, Bullock-Saxton IE, Cavarretta F, et al. Repeatability of maximal voluntary force and of surface EMG variables during voluntary isometric contraction of quadriceps muscles in healthy subjects. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2001; 11: 425–438CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Rainoldi A, Galardi G, Maderna L, et al. Repeatability of surface EMG variables during voluntary isometric contractions of the biceps brachii. J Eletromyogr Kinesiol 1999; 9: 105–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Kellis E, Baltzopoulis V. The effects of normalization method on antagonist activity patterns during eccentric and concentric isokinetic knee extension and flexion. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 1996; 6: 235–245CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Linnamo V, Moritani T, Nicol C, et al. Motor unit activation patterns during isometric, concentric and eccentric actions at different force levels. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2003; 13: 93–101CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Moritani T, Muramatsu S, Muro M. Activity of motor units during concentric and eccentric contractions. Am J Phys Med 1988; 66: 338–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Mogk PMJ, Keir P. Crosstalk in surface electromyography of the proximal forearm during gripping tasks. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2003; 13: 63–71CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    Winter DA, Fuglevand AJ, Archer SE. Crosstalk in surface electromyography: theoretical and practical estimates. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 1994; 4: 15–26CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Farina D, Merletti R, Indino B, et al. Surface EMG crosstalk between knee extensor muscles: experimental and model results. Muscle Nerve 2002; 26: 681–695CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Lowery M, Stoykov NS, Kuiken TA. A simulation study to examine the use of cross-correlation as an estimate of surface EMG cross talk. J Appl Physiol 2003; 94: 1324–1334PubMedGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    MacDougall J, Elder G, Sale D, et al. Effect of training and immobilization on human muscle fibers. Eur J Appl Physiol 1980; 43: 25–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Miles MP, Ives JC, Vincent KR. Neuromuscular control following maximal eccentric exercise. Eur J Appl Physiol 1997; 76: 368–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. 143.
    Sayers S, Clarkson PM. Force recovery after eccentric exercise in males and females. Eur J Appl Physiol 2001; 84: 122–126CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Zijdewind I, Toering S, Bessem B, et al. Effects of imagery motor training on torque production on ankle plantar flexor muscles. Muscle Nerve 2003; 28: 168–173CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  145. 145.
    Hall C, Thein Brody L. Impairment in muscle performance. In: Hall C, Thein Brody L, editors. Therapeutic exercise: moving toward function. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 1999: 58–59Google Scholar
  146. 146.
    Thépaut-Mathieu C, Van Hoecke J, Maton B. Myoelectrical and mechanical changes linked to length specificity during isometric training. J Appl Physiol 1988; 64: 1500–1505PubMedGoogle Scholar
  147. 147.
    Weir JP, Housh TJ, Weir LL. Electromyographic evaluation of joint angles specificity and cross-training after isometric training. J Appl Physiol 1994; 77: 197–201PubMedGoogle Scholar
  148. 148.
    Knapik J J, Mawadsley RH, Ramos MU. Angular specificity and test mode specificity of isometric and isokinetic strength training. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1983; 5: 58–65PubMedGoogle Scholar
  149. 149.
    Bandy W, Hanten W. Changes in torque and electromyographic activity of the quadriceps femoris muscles following isometric training. Phys Ther 1993; 73: 455–465PubMedGoogle Scholar
  150. 150.
    Hirokawa S, Solomonow M, Lu Y, et al. Anterior-posterior and rotational displacement of the tibia elicited by quadriceps contraction. Am J Sports Med 1992; 20: 299–306CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  151. 151.
    More RC, Karras BT, Neiman R, et al. Hamstrings: an anterior cruciate ligament protagonist: an in vitro study. Am J Sports Med 1993; 21: 231–237CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  152. 152.
    Renstrom P, Arms SW, Stanwyck TS, et al. Strain within the anterior cruciate ligament during hamstring and quadriceps activity. Am J Sports Med 1986; 14: 83–87CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  153. 153.
    Kisner C, Colby LA. Therapeutic exercise: foundations and techniques. 3rd ed. Philadelphia (PA): FA Davis, 1996Google Scholar
  154. 154.
    Gabriel DA, Basford J, An K-N. Training-related changes in the maximal rate of torque development and EMG activity. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2001; 11: 123–129CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  155. 155.
    Maffiuletti NA, Martin A. Progressive versus rapid rate of contraction during 7 wk of isometric resistive training. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001; 33: 1220–1227PubMedGoogle Scholar
  156. 156.
    Schultz AB, Ashton-Miller JA, Alexander NB. What leads to age and gender differences in balance maintenance and recover. Muscle Nerve Suppl 1997; 5: S60–S64CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  157. 157.
    Holder-Powell HM, Rutherford OM. Reduction in range of movement can increase maximum voluntary eccentric forces for the human knee extensor muscles. Eur J Appl Physiol 1999; 80: 502–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. 158.
    Sherrington C. The integrative action of the nervous system. New Haven (CT): Yale University Press, 1906Google Scholar
  159. 159.
    Kabat H. Studies on neuromuscular dysfunction: XV The role of central facilitation in the restoration of motor function in paralysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1950; 33: 521–533Google Scholar
  160. 160.
    Pearson K, Gordon J. Spinal reflexes. In: Kandall ER, Schwartz JH, Jessell TM, editors. Principles of neural science. 4th ed. New York: Elsevier, 2000: 713–736Google Scholar
  161. 161.
    Lloyd DPC. Reflex action in relation to pattern and peripheral source of afferent stimulation. J Neurophysiol 1943; 6: 111–120Google Scholar
  162. 162.
    Moore M, Kukulka C. Depression of Hoffman reflexes following voluntary contraction and implications for proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation therapy. Phys Ther 1991; 71: 321–329PubMedGoogle Scholar
  163. 163.
    Gabriel DA, Basford J, An K-N. The reversal of antagonists facilitates the peak rate of tension development. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001; 82: 342–346CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  164. 164.
    Bohannon R. Knee extension torque during repeated knee extension-flexion reversals and separated knee extension-flexion dyads. Phys Ther 1986; 65: 1052–1054Google Scholar
  165. 165.
    Bohannon R, Gibson D, Larkin P. Effect of resisted knee flexion on knee extension torque. Phys Ther 1986; 66: 1239–1241PubMedGoogle Scholar
  166. 166.
    Grabiner M. Maximum rate of force development is increased by antagonist conditioning contraction. J Appl Physiol 1994; 77: 807–811PubMedGoogle Scholar
  167. 167.
    Kvist J, Gillquist J. Sagittal plane knee translation and electromyographic activity during closed and open kinetic chain exercises in anterior cruciate ligament-deficient patients and control subjects. Am J Sports Med 2001; 29: 72–82PubMedGoogle Scholar
  168. 168.
    Osternig LR, James CR, Bercades D. Effects of movement speed and joint position on knee flexor torque in healthy and post-surgical subjects. Eur J Appl Physiol 1999; 80: 100–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. 169.
    Aagaard P, Simonsen EB, Andersen JL, et al. Antagonist muscle co-activation during isokinetic knee extension. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2000a; 10: 58–67CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  170. 170.
    Doorenbosch CAM, Harlaar J. A clinically applicable EMG-force model to quantify active stabilization of the knee after lesion of the anterior cruciate ligament. Clin Biomech 2003; 18: 142–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  171. 171.
    Kellis E, Baltzopoulis V. The effects of the antagonist muscle force on intersegmental loading during isokinetic efforts of the knee extensors. J Biomech 1999; 32: 19–25CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Physical Education and KinesiologyBrock UniversitySt CatharinesCanada
  2. 2.Department of Exercise ScienceUniversity of Massachusetts at AmherstAmherstUSA

Personalised recommendations