Muscle activation during three sets to failure at 80 vs. 30 % 1RM resistance exercise

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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

37 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate electromyographic amplitude (EMG AMP), EMG mean power frequency (MPF), exercise volume (VOL), total work and muscle activation (iEMG), and time under concentric load (TUCL) during, and muscle cross-sectional area (mCSA) before and after 3 sets to failure at 80 vs. 30 % 1RM resistance exercise. Methods: Nine men (mean ± SD, age 21.0 ± 2.4 years, resistance training week−1 6.0 ± 3.7 h) and 9 women (age 22.8 ± 3.8 years, resistance training week−1 3.4 ± 3.5 h) completed 1RM testing, followed by 2 experimental sessions during which they completed 3 sets to failure of leg extension exercise at 80 or 30 % 1RM. EMG signals were collected to quantify EMG AMP and MPF during the initial, middle, and last repetition of each set. Ultrasound was used to assess mCSA pre- and post-exercise, and VOL, total work, iEMG, and TUCL were calculated. Results: EMG AMP remained greater at 80 % than 30 % 1RM across all reps and sets, despite increasing 74 and 147 % across reps at 80 and 30 % 1RM, respectively. EMG MPF decreased across reps at 80 and 30 % 1RM, but decreased more and was lower for the last reps at 30 than 80 % 1RM (71.6 vs. 78.1 % MVIC). mCSA increased more from pre- to post-exercise for 30 % (20.2–24.1 cm2) than 80 % 1RM (20.3–22.8 cm2). VOL, total work, iEMG and TUCL were greater for 30 % than 80 % 1RM. Conclusion: Muscle activation was greater at 80 % 1RM. However, differences in volume, metabolic byproduct accumulation, and muscle swelling may help explain the unexpected adaptations in hypertrophy vs. strength observed in previous studies.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2335-2347
Number of pages13
JournalEuropean Journal of Applied Physiology
Volume115
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2015

Fingerprint

Exercise
Muscles
Hypertrophy
Leg

Keywords

  • Electromyography
  • Exercise volume
  • Muscle fatigue
  • Muscle size
  • Resistance training intensity
  • Skeletal muscle

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
  • Physiology (medical)
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Jenkins, N. D. M., Housh, T. J., Bergstrom, H. C., Cochrane, K. C., Hill, E. C., Smith, C. M., ... Cramer, J. T. (2015). Muscle activation during three sets to failure at 80 vs. 30 % 1RM resistance exercise. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 115(11), 2335-2347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-015-3214-9

Muscle activation during three sets to failure at 80 vs. 30 % 1RM resistance exercise. / Jenkins, Nathaniel D M; Housh, Terry J.; Bergstrom, Haley C.; Cochrane, Kristen C.; Hill, Ethan C.; Smith, Cory M.; Johnson, Glen O.; Schmidt, Richard J.; Cramer, Joel T.

In: European Journal of Applied Physiology, Vol. 115, No. 11, 01.11.2015, p. 2335-2347.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Jenkins, NDM, Housh, TJ, Bergstrom, HC, Cochrane, KC, Hill, EC, Smith, CM, Johnson, GO, Schmidt, RJ & Cramer, JT 2015, 'Muscle activation during three sets to failure at 80 vs. 30 % 1RM resistance exercise', European Journal of Applied Physiology, vol. 115, no. 11, pp. 2335-2347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-015-3214-9
Jenkins, Nathaniel D M ; Housh, Terry J. ; Bergstrom, Haley C. ; Cochrane, Kristen C. ; Hill, Ethan C. ; Smith, Cory M. ; Johnson, Glen O. ; Schmidt, Richard J. ; Cramer, Joel T. / Muscle activation during three sets to failure at 80 vs. 30 % 1RM resistance exercise. In: European Journal of Applied Physiology. 2015 ; Vol. 115, No. 11. pp. 2335-2347.
@article{d5f22f32f56c4f7cb20128d2bff60958,
title = "Muscle activation during three sets to failure at 80 vs. 30 {\%} 1RM resistance exercise",
abstract = "Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate electromyographic amplitude (EMG AMP), EMG mean power frequency (MPF), exercise volume (VOL), total work and muscle activation (iEMG), and time under concentric load (TUCL) during, and muscle cross-sectional area (mCSA) before and after 3 sets to failure at 80 vs. 30 {\%} 1RM resistance exercise. Methods: Nine men (mean ± SD, age 21.0 ± 2.4 years, resistance training week−1 6.0 ± 3.7 h) and 9 women (age 22.8 ± 3.8 years, resistance training week−1 3.4 ± 3.5 h) completed 1RM testing, followed by 2 experimental sessions during which they completed 3 sets to failure of leg extension exercise at 80 or 30 {\%} 1RM. EMG signals were collected to quantify EMG AMP and MPF during the initial, middle, and last repetition of each set. Ultrasound was used to assess mCSA pre- and post-exercise, and VOL, total work, iEMG, and TUCL were calculated. Results: EMG AMP remained greater at 80 {\%} than 30 {\%} 1RM across all reps and sets, despite increasing 74 and 147 {\%} across reps at 80 and 30 {\%} 1RM, respectively. EMG MPF decreased across reps at 80 and 30 {\%} 1RM, but decreased more and was lower for the last reps at 30 than 80 {\%} 1RM (71.6 vs. 78.1 {\%} MVIC). mCSA increased more from pre- to post-exercise for 30 {\%} (20.2–24.1 cm2) than 80 {\%} 1RM (20.3–22.8 cm2). VOL, total work, iEMG and TUCL were greater for 30 {\%} than 80 {\%} 1RM. Conclusion: Muscle activation was greater at 80 {\%} 1RM. However, differences in volume, metabolic byproduct accumulation, and muscle swelling may help explain the unexpected adaptations in hypertrophy vs. strength observed in previous studies.",
keywords = "Electromyography, Exercise volume, Muscle fatigue, Muscle size, Resistance training intensity, Skeletal muscle",
author = "Jenkins, {Nathaniel D M} and Housh, {Terry J.} and Bergstrom, {Haley C.} and Cochrane, {Kristen C.} and Hill, {Ethan C.} and Smith, {Cory M.} and Johnson, {Glen O.} and Schmidt, {Richard J.} and Cramer, {Joel T}",
year = "2015",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00421-015-3214-9",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "115",
pages = "2335--2347",
journal = "European Journal of Applied Physiology",
issn = "1439-6319",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Muscle activation during three sets to failure at 80 vs. 30 % 1RM resistance exercise

AU - Jenkins, Nathaniel D M

AU - Housh, Terry J.

AU - Bergstrom, Haley C.

AU - Cochrane, Kristen C.

AU - Hill, Ethan C.

AU - Smith, Cory M.

AU - Johnson, Glen O.

AU - Schmidt, Richard J.

AU - Cramer, Joel T

PY - 2015/11/1

Y1 - 2015/11/1

N2 - Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate electromyographic amplitude (EMG AMP), EMG mean power frequency (MPF), exercise volume (VOL), total work and muscle activation (iEMG), and time under concentric load (TUCL) during, and muscle cross-sectional area (mCSA) before and after 3 sets to failure at 80 vs. 30 % 1RM resistance exercise. Methods: Nine men (mean ± SD, age 21.0 ± 2.4 years, resistance training week−1 6.0 ± 3.7 h) and 9 women (age 22.8 ± 3.8 years, resistance training week−1 3.4 ± 3.5 h) completed 1RM testing, followed by 2 experimental sessions during which they completed 3 sets to failure of leg extension exercise at 80 or 30 % 1RM. EMG signals were collected to quantify EMG AMP and MPF during the initial, middle, and last repetition of each set. Ultrasound was used to assess mCSA pre- and post-exercise, and VOL, total work, iEMG, and TUCL were calculated. Results: EMG AMP remained greater at 80 % than 30 % 1RM across all reps and sets, despite increasing 74 and 147 % across reps at 80 and 30 % 1RM, respectively. EMG MPF decreased across reps at 80 and 30 % 1RM, but decreased more and was lower for the last reps at 30 than 80 % 1RM (71.6 vs. 78.1 % MVIC). mCSA increased more from pre- to post-exercise for 30 % (20.2–24.1 cm2) than 80 % 1RM (20.3–22.8 cm2). VOL, total work, iEMG and TUCL were greater for 30 % than 80 % 1RM. Conclusion: Muscle activation was greater at 80 % 1RM. However, differences in volume, metabolic byproduct accumulation, and muscle swelling may help explain the unexpected adaptations in hypertrophy vs. strength observed in previous studies.

AB - Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate electromyographic amplitude (EMG AMP), EMG mean power frequency (MPF), exercise volume (VOL), total work and muscle activation (iEMG), and time under concentric load (TUCL) during, and muscle cross-sectional area (mCSA) before and after 3 sets to failure at 80 vs. 30 % 1RM resistance exercise. Methods: Nine men (mean ± SD, age 21.0 ± 2.4 years, resistance training week−1 6.0 ± 3.7 h) and 9 women (age 22.8 ± 3.8 years, resistance training week−1 3.4 ± 3.5 h) completed 1RM testing, followed by 2 experimental sessions during which they completed 3 sets to failure of leg extension exercise at 80 or 30 % 1RM. EMG signals were collected to quantify EMG AMP and MPF during the initial, middle, and last repetition of each set. Ultrasound was used to assess mCSA pre- and post-exercise, and VOL, total work, iEMG, and TUCL were calculated. Results: EMG AMP remained greater at 80 % than 30 % 1RM across all reps and sets, despite increasing 74 and 147 % across reps at 80 and 30 % 1RM, respectively. EMG MPF decreased across reps at 80 and 30 % 1RM, but decreased more and was lower for the last reps at 30 than 80 % 1RM (71.6 vs. 78.1 % MVIC). mCSA increased more from pre- to post-exercise for 30 % (20.2–24.1 cm2) than 80 % 1RM (20.3–22.8 cm2). VOL, total work, iEMG and TUCL were greater for 30 % than 80 % 1RM. Conclusion: Muscle activation was greater at 80 % 1RM. However, differences in volume, metabolic byproduct accumulation, and muscle swelling may help explain the unexpected adaptations in hypertrophy vs. strength observed in previous studies.

KW - Electromyography

KW - Exercise volume

KW - Muscle fatigue

KW - Muscle size

KW - Resistance training intensity

KW - Skeletal muscle

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84944348629&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84944348629&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00421-015-3214-9

DO - 10.1007/s00421-015-3214-9

M3 - Article

VL - 115

SP - 2335

EP - 2347

JO - European Journal of Applied Physiology

JF - European Journal of Applied Physiology

SN - 1439-6319

IS - 11

ER -