Download PDF
Int J Sports Med 2012; 33(12): 970-974
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1314813
Training & Testing
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Multivariate Analysis in the Maximum Strength Performance

E. O. de Souza
1   Department of Sport, School of Physical Education and Sport, University of São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
V. Tricoli
1   Department of Sport, School of Physical Education and Sport, University of São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
A. C. Paulo
1   Department of Sport, School of Physical Education and Sport, University of São Paulo, SP, Brazil
2   Department of Physical Education, Universidade Paulista (UNIP), São Paulo, Brazil
3   Department of Physical Education, Universidade Nove de Julho, São paulo Brazil
,
C. Silva-Batista
1   Department of Sport, School of Physical Education and Sport, University of São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
R. K. Cardoso
1   Department of Sport, School of Physical Education and Sport, University of São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
P. C. Brum
1   Department of Sport, School of Physical Education and Sport, University of São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
A.V. N. Bacurau
1   Department of Sport, School of Physical Education and Sport, University of São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
G. Laurentino
1   Department of Sport, School of Physical Education and Sport, University of São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
M. Neves-Jr
4   School of Medicine, University of São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
A. Y. Aihara
5   Diagnósticos das Américas S/A (DASA), SP, Brazil
6   Department of Radiology of Federal University of São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
C. Ugrinowitsch
1   Department of Sport, School of Physical Education and Sport, University of São Paulo, SP, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History



accepted after revision 24 April 2012

Publication Date:
15 August 2012 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

This study performed an exploratory analysis of the anthropometrical and morphological muscle variables related to the one-repetition maximum (1RM) performance. In addition, the capacity of these variables to predict the force production was analyzed. 50 active males were submitted to the experimental procedures: vastus lateralis muscle biopsy, quadriceps magnetic resonance imaging, body mass assessment and 1RM test in the leg-press exercise. K-means cluster analysis was performed after obtaining the body mass, sum of the left and right quadriceps muscle cross-sectional area (∑CSA), percentage of the type II fibers and the 1RM performance. The number of clusters was defined a priori and then were labeled as high strength performance (HSP1RM) group and low strength performance (LSP1RM) group. Stepwise multiple regressions were performed by means of body mass, ∑CSA, percentage of the type II fibers and clusters as predictors’ variables and 1RM performance as response variable. The clusters mean±SD were: 292.8±52.1 kg, 84.7±17.9 kg, 19 249.7±1 645.5 mm2 and 50.8±7.2% for the HSP1RM and 254.0±51.1 kg, 69.2±8.1 kg, 15 483.1±1 104.8 mm2 and 51.7±6.2%, for the LSP1RM in the 1RM, body mass, ∑CSA and muscle fiber type II percentage, respectively. The most important variable in the clusters division was the ∑CSA. In addition, the ∑CSA and muscle fiber type II percentage explained the variance in the 1RM performance (Adj R2=0.35, p=0.0001) for all participants and for the LSP1RM (Adj R2=0.25, p=0.002). For the HSP1RM, only the ∑CSA was entered in the model and showed the highest capacity to explain the variance in the 1RM performance (Adj R2=0.38, p=0.01). As a conclusion, the muscle CSA was the most relevant variable to predict force production in individuals with no strength training background.

Key words

1RM - muscle biopsy - cross-sectional area - body mass
 

  • References

  • 1 Aagaard P, Andersen JL, Dyhre-Poulsen P, Leffers AM, Wagner A, Magnusson SP, Halkjaer-Kristensen J, Simonsen EB. A mechanism for increased contractile strength of human pennate muscle in response to strength training: changes in muscle architecture. J Physiol 2001; 534: 613-623
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Abernethy P, Wilson G, Logan P. Strength and power assessment. Issues, controversies and challenges. Sports Med 1995; 19: 401-417
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Baker D, Wilson G, Carlyon B. Generality versus specificity: a comparison of dynamic and isometric measures of strength and speed-strength. Eur J Appl Physiol 1994; 68: 350-355
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Bamman MM, Petrella JK, Kim JS, Mayhew DL, Cross JM. Cluster analysis tests the importance of myogenic gene expression during myofiber hypertrophy in humans. J Appl Physiol 2007; 102: 2232-2239
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Brooke MH, Kaiser KK. Muscle fiber types: how many and what kind?. Arch Neurol 1970; 23: 369-379
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Brown LE, Weir JP. ASEP procedures recommendation I: accurate assessment of muscular strength and power. JEPonline 2001; 4: 1-21
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Douris PC, White BP, Cullen RR, Keltz WE, Meli J, Mondiello DM, Wenger D. The relationship between maximal repetition performance and muscle fiber type as estimated by noninvasive technique in the quadriceps of untrained women. J Strength Cond Res 2006; 20: 699-703
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Edman KA. Contractile performance of striated muscle. Adv Exp Med Biol 2010; 682: 7-40
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Fry AC, Schilling BK, Staron RS, Hagerman FC, Hikida RS, Thrush JT. Muscle fiber characteristics and performance correlates of male Olympic-style weightlifters. J Strength Cond Res 2003; 17: 746-754
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Fry AC, Webber JM, Weiss LW, Harber MP, Vaczi M, Pattison NA. Muscle fiber characteristics of competitive power lifters. J Strength Cond Res 2003; 17: 402-410
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Hakkinen K, Hakkinen A. Muscle cross-sectional area, force production and relaxation characteristics in women at different ages. Eur J Appl Physiol 1991; 62: 410-414
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Hakkinen K, Keskinen KL. Muscle cross-sectional area and voluntary force production characteristics in elite strength- and endurance-trained athletes and sprinters. Eur J Appl Physiol 1989; 59: 215-220
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Harriss DJ, Atkinson G. Update – ethical standards in sport and exercise science research. Int J Sports Med 2011; 32: 819-821
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Henwood TR, Riek S, Taaffe DR. Strength versus muscle power-specific resistance training in community-dwelling older adults. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2008; 63: 83-91
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Hunter SK, Critchlow A, Enoka RM. Muscle endurance is greater for old men compared with strength-matched young men. J Appl Physiol 2005; 99: 890-897
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Izquierdo M, Ibanez J, Hakkinen K, Kraemer WJ, Ruesta M, Gorostiaga EM. Maximal strength and power, muscle mass, endurance and serum hormones in weightlifters and road cyclists. J Sports Sci 2004; 22: 465-478
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Jones JH, Lindstedt SL. Limits to maximal performance. Annu Rev Physiol 1993; 55: 547-569
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Kawakami Y, Abe T, Fukunaga T. Muscle-fiber pennation angles are greater in hypertrophied than in normal muscles. J Appl Physiol 1993; 74: 2740-2744
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Kawakami Y, Abe T, Kuno SY, Fukunaga T. Training-induced changes in muscle architecture and specific tension. Eur J Appl Physiol 1995; 72: 37-43
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Mayhew JL, Piper FC, Ware MS. Anthropometric correlates with strength performance among resistance trained athletes. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 1993; 33: 159-165
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Prince FP, Hikida RS, Hagerman FC. Human muscle fiber types in power lifters, distance runners and untrained subjects. Pflugers Arch 1976; 363: 19-26
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Reynolds JM, Gordon TJ, Robergs RA. Prediction of one repetition maximum strength from multiple repetition maximum testing and anthropometry. J Strength Cond Res 2006; 20: 584-592
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Sanchez-Medina L, Perez CE, Gonzalez-Badillo JJ. Importance of the propulsive phase in strength assessment. Int J Sports Med 2010; 31: 123-129
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Terzis G, Spengos K, Manta P, Sarris N, Georgiadis G. Fiber type composition and capillary density in relation to submaximal number of repetitions in resistance exercise. J Strength Cond Res 2008; 22: 845-850
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Trappe SW, Trappe TA, Lee GA, Costill DL. Calf muscle strength in humans. Int J Sports Med 2001; 22: 186-191
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Tricoli V, Lamas L, Carnevale R, Ugrinowitsch C. Short-term effects on lower-body functional power development: weightlifting vs. vertical jump training programs. J Strength Cond Res 2005; 19: 433-437
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Widrick JJ, Trappe SW, Costill DL, Fitts RH. Force-velocity and force-power properties of single muscle fibers from elite master runners and sedentary men. Am J Physiol 1996; 271: C676-C683
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Wisloff U, Castagna C, Helgerud J, Jones R, Hoff J. Strong correlation of maximal squat strength with sprint performance and vertical jump height in elite soccer players. Br J Sports Med 2004; 38: 285-288
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar