Can muscle typology explain the inter-individual variability in resistance training adaptations?

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Standard

Can muscle typology explain the inter-individual variability in resistance training adaptations? / Van Vossel, Kim; Hardeel, Julie; Van de Casteele, Freek; Van der Stede, Thibaux; Weyns, Anneleen; Boone, Jan; Blemker, Silvia Salinas; Lievens, Eline; Derave, Wim.

I: Journal of Physiology, Bind 601, Nr. 12, 2023, s. 2307-2327.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Harvard

Van Vossel, K, Hardeel, J, Van de Casteele, F, Van der Stede, T, Weyns, A, Boone, J, Blemker, SS, Lievens, E & Derave, W 2023, 'Can muscle typology explain the inter-individual variability in resistance training adaptations?', Journal of Physiology, bind 601, nr. 12, s. 2307-2327. https://doi.org/10.1113/JP284442

APA

Van Vossel, K., Hardeel, J., Van de Casteele, F., Van der Stede, T., Weyns, A., Boone, J., Blemker, S. S., Lievens, E., & Derave, W. (2023). Can muscle typology explain the inter-individual variability in resistance training adaptations? Journal of Physiology, 601(12), 2307-2327. https://doi.org/10.1113/JP284442

Vancouver

Van Vossel K, Hardeel J, Van de Casteele F, Van der Stede T, Weyns A, Boone J o.a. Can muscle typology explain the inter-individual variability in resistance training adaptations? Journal of Physiology. 2023;601(12):2307-2327. https://doi.org/10.1113/JP284442

Author

Van Vossel, Kim ; Hardeel, Julie ; Van de Casteele, Freek ; Van der Stede, Thibaux ; Weyns, Anneleen ; Boone, Jan ; Blemker, Silvia Salinas ; Lievens, Eline ; Derave, Wim. / Can muscle typology explain the inter-individual variability in resistance training adaptations?. I: Journal of Physiology. 2023 ; Bind 601, Nr. 12. s. 2307-2327.

Bibtex

@article{ea1a8c11a8a84e6b8e1ba19eefae3a0b,
title = "Can muscle typology explain the inter-individual variability in resistance training adaptations?",
abstract = "Considerable inter-individual heterogeneity exists in the muscular adaptations to resistance training. It has been proposed that fast-twitch fibres are more sensitive to hypertrophic stimuli and thus that variation in muscle fibre type composition is a contributing factor to the magnitude of training response. This study investigated if the inter-individual variability in resistance training adaptations is determined by muscle typology and if the most appropriate weekly training frequency depends on muscle typology. In strength-training novices, 11 slow (ST) and 10 fast typology (FT) individuals were selected by measuring muscle carnosine with proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Participants trained both upper arm and leg muscles to failure at 60% of one-repetition maximum (1RM) for 10 weeks, whereby one arm and leg trained 3×/week and the contralateral arm and leg 2×/week. Muscle volume (MRI-based 3D segmentation), maximal dynamic strength (1RM) and fibre type-specific cross-sectional area (vastus lateralis biopsies) were evaluated. The training response for total muscle volume (+3 to +14%), fibre size (−19 to +22%) and strength (+17 to +47%) showed considerable inter-individual variability, but these could not be attributed to differences in muscle typology. However, ST individuals performed a significantly higher training volume to gain these similar adaptations than FT individuals. The limb that trained 3×/week had generally more pronounced hypertrophy than the limb that trained 2×/week, and there was no interaction with muscle typology. In conclusion, muscle typology cannot explain the high variability in resistance training adaptations when training is performed to failure at 60% of 1RM. (Figure presented.). ",
keywords = "Blood flow, Dynamic strength, Fibre cross-sectional area, Hypertrophy, Muscle typology, Resistance training, Resistance training frequency, Resistance training volume",
author = "{Van Vossel}, Kim and Julie Hardeel and {Van de Casteele}, Freek and {Van der Stede}, Thibaux and Anneleen Weyns and Jan Boone and Blemker, {Silvia Salinas} and Eline Lievens and Wim Derave",
note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2023 The Authors. The Journal of Physiology {\textcopyright} 2023 The Physiological Society.",
year = "2023",
doi = "10.1113/JP284442",
language = "English",
volume = "601",
pages = "2307--2327",
journal = "The Journal of Physiology",
issn = "0022-3751",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "12",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Can muscle typology explain the inter-individual variability in resistance training adaptations?

AU - Van Vossel, Kim

AU - Hardeel, Julie

AU - Van de Casteele, Freek

AU - Van der Stede, Thibaux

AU - Weyns, Anneleen

AU - Boone, Jan

AU - Blemker, Silvia Salinas

AU - Lievens, Eline

AU - Derave, Wim

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2023 The Authors. The Journal of Physiology © 2023 The Physiological Society.

PY - 2023

Y1 - 2023

N2 - Considerable inter-individual heterogeneity exists in the muscular adaptations to resistance training. It has been proposed that fast-twitch fibres are more sensitive to hypertrophic stimuli and thus that variation in muscle fibre type composition is a contributing factor to the magnitude of training response. This study investigated if the inter-individual variability in resistance training adaptations is determined by muscle typology and if the most appropriate weekly training frequency depends on muscle typology. In strength-training novices, 11 slow (ST) and 10 fast typology (FT) individuals were selected by measuring muscle carnosine with proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Participants trained both upper arm and leg muscles to failure at 60% of one-repetition maximum (1RM) for 10 weeks, whereby one arm and leg trained 3×/week and the contralateral arm and leg 2×/week. Muscle volume (MRI-based 3D segmentation), maximal dynamic strength (1RM) and fibre type-specific cross-sectional area (vastus lateralis biopsies) were evaluated. The training response for total muscle volume (+3 to +14%), fibre size (−19 to +22%) and strength (+17 to +47%) showed considerable inter-individual variability, but these could not be attributed to differences in muscle typology. However, ST individuals performed a significantly higher training volume to gain these similar adaptations than FT individuals. The limb that trained 3×/week had generally more pronounced hypertrophy than the limb that trained 2×/week, and there was no interaction with muscle typology. In conclusion, muscle typology cannot explain the high variability in resistance training adaptations when training is performed to failure at 60% of 1RM. (Figure presented.). 

AB - Considerable inter-individual heterogeneity exists in the muscular adaptations to resistance training. It has been proposed that fast-twitch fibres are more sensitive to hypertrophic stimuli and thus that variation in muscle fibre type composition is a contributing factor to the magnitude of training response. This study investigated if the inter-individual variability in resistance training adaptations is determined by muscle typology and if the most appropriate weekly training frequency depends on muscle typology. In strength-training novices, 11 slow (ST) and 10 fast typology (FT) individuals were selected by measuring muscle carnosine with proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Participants trained both upper arm and leg muscles to failure at 60% of one-repetition maximum (1RM) for 10 weeks, whereby one arm and leg trained 3×/week and the contralateral arm and leg 2×/week. Muscle volume (MRI-based 3D segmentation), maximal dynamic strength (1RM) and fibre type-specific cross-sectional area (vastus lateralis biopsies) were evaluated. The training response for total muscle volume (+3 to +14%), fibre size (−19 to +22%) and strength (+17 to +47%) showed considerable inter-individual variability, but these could not be attributed to differences in muscle typology. However, ST individuals performed a significantly higher training volume to gain these similar adaptations than FT individuals. The limb that trained 3×/week had generally more pronounced hypertrophy than the limb that trained 2×/week, and there was no interaction with muscle typology. In conclusion, muscle typology cannot explain the high variability in resistance training adaptations when training is performed to failure at 60% of 1RM. (Figure presented.). 

KW - Blood flow

KW - Dynamic strength

KW - Fibre cross-sectional area

KW - Hypertrophy

KW - Muscle typology

KW - Resistance training

KW - Resistance training frequency

KW - Resistance training volume

U2 - 10.1113/JP284442

DO - 10.1113/JP284442

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 37038845

AN - SCOPUS:85153622889

VL - 601

SP - 2307

EP - 2327

JO - The Journal of Physiology

JF - The Journal of Physiology

SN - 0022-3751

IS - 12

ER -

ID: 346141592