Neural adaptations to resistance training - Implications for movement control

It has long been believed that resistance training is accompanied by changes within the nervous system that play an important role in the development of strength. Many elements of the nervous system exhibit the potential for adaptation in response to resistance training, including supraspinal centres, descending neural tracts, spinal circuitry and the motor end plate connections between motoneurons and muscle fibres. Yet the specific sites of adaptation along the neuraxis have seldom been identified experimentally, and much of the evidence for neural adaptations following resistance training remains indirect. As a consequence of this current lack of knowledge, there exists uncertainty regarding the manner in which resistance training impacts upon the control and execution of functional movements. We aim to demonstrate that resistance training is likely to cause adaptations to many neural elements that are involved in the control of movement, and is therefore likely to affect movement execution during a wide range of tasks. We review a small number of experiments that provide evidence that resistance training affects the way in which muscles that have been engaged during training are recruited during related movement tasks. The concepts addressed in this article represent an important new approach to research on the effects of resistance training. They are also of considerable practical importance, since most individuals perform resistance training in the expectation that it will enhance their performance in-related functional tasks.

Long-term metabolic and skeletal muscle adaptations to short-sprint training: Implications for sprint training and tapering

The adaptations of muscle to sprint training can be separated into metabolic and morphological changes. Enzyme adaptations represent a major metabolic adaptation to sprint training, with the enzymes of all three energy systems showing signs of adaptation to training and some evidence of a return to baseline levels with detraining. Myokinase and creatine phosphokinase have shown small increases as a result of short-sprint training in some studies and elite sprinters appear better able to rapidly breakdown phosphocreatine (PCr) than the sub-elite. No changes in these enzyme levels have been reported as a result of detraining. Similarly, glycolytic enzyme activity (notably lactate dehydrogenase, phosphofructokinase and glycogen phosphorylase) has been shown to increase after training consisting of either long (> 10-second) or short (< 10-second) sprints. Evidence suggests that these enzymes return to pre-training levels after somewhere between 7 weeks and 6 months of detraining. Mitochondrial enzyme activity also increases after sprint training, particularly when long sprints or short recovery between short sprints are used as the training stimulus. Morphological adaptations to sprint training include changes in muscle fibre type, sarcoplasmic reticulum, and fibre cross-sectional area. An appropriate sprint training programme could be expected to induce a shift toward type Ha muscle, increase muscle cross-sectional area and increase the sarcoplasmic reticulum volume to aid release of Ca2+. Training volume and/or frequency of sprint training in excess of what is optimal for an individual, however, will induce a shift toward slower muscle contractile characteristics. In contrast, detraining appears to shift the contractile characteristics towards type IIb, although muscle atrophy is also likely to occur. Muscle conduction velocity appears to be a potential non-invasive method of monitoring contractile changes in response to sprint training and detraining. In summary, adaptation to sprint training is clearly dependent on the duration of sprinting, recovery between repetitions, total volume and frequency of training bouts. These variables have profound effects on the metabolic, structural and performance adaptations from a sprint-training programme and these changes take a considerable period of time to return to baseline after a period of detraining. However, the complexity of the interaction between the aforementioned variables and training adaptation combined with individual differences is clearly disruptive to the transfer of knowledge and advice from laboratory to coach to athlete.