Resistance exercise energy expenditure is greater with fatigue as compared to non-fatigue

C B Scott, Conrad P Earnest

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We retrospectively investigated data from two separate studies to estimate and compare aerobic and anaerobic exercise energy expenditure (EE) along with the aerobic recovery EE component for 1-set of resistance exercise. One study was completed using non-fatiguing lifts where the exercise was stopped before muscular failure. In another study muscular failure (fatigue) was the end point of all lifts. Work (weight lifted × upward vertical displacement) and all EE components were examined. Non-fatiguing lifts were carried out at 50% of a 1-RM for 7, 14 and 21 repetitions. Lifts to failure were carried out at ~37%, ~46%, ~56%, 70%, 80% and 90% of a 1-RM. Individual regression lines were created for fatigue and non-fatigue conditions for each male subject between work and all estimates of EE. The results of our analyses showed that the averaged slopes between fatigue and non-fatigue were proportional for: total EE/work (p = 0.87), anaerobic exercise EE/work, (p= 0.73) and recovery EE/work (p = 0.19). However, the Y-intercepts of the two studies were significantly greater for fatiguing as compared to non-fatiguing lifting for: total EE/work (p = 0.007), anaerobic exercise EE/work (p = 0.001) and recovery EE/work (p = 0.01), but not aerobic exercise EE/work (p = 0.17). For aerobic exercise EE/work, lifting to fatigue had a greater O2 uptake/work slope as compared to lifts that were not completed to fatigue (p = 0.04). We conclude that lifting a weight to muscular failure can entail significantly greater aerobic, anaerobic and recovery EE components as compared to non-fatiguing lifting.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-10
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Exercise Physiology Online
Volume14
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2011

Fingerprint

Energy Metabolism
Fatigue
Exercise
Weight Lifting
Muscle Fatigue
Weights and Measures

Cite this

Resistance exercise energy expenditure is greater with fatigue as compared to non-fatigue. / Scott, C B; Earnest, Conrad P.

In: Journal of Exercise Physiology Online, Vol. 14, No. 1, 02.2011, p. 1-10.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{64f5e19a6f114b89875b05b35ab121f4,
title = "Resistance exercise energy expenditure is greater with fatigue as compared to non-fatigue",
abstract = "We retrospectively investigated data from two separate studies to estimate and compare aerobic and anaerobic exercise energy expenditure (EE) along with the aerobic recovery EE component for 1-set of resistance exercise. One study was completed using non-fatiguing lifts where the exercise was stopped before muscular failure. In another study muscular failure (fatigue) was the end point of all lifts. Work (weight lifted × upward vertical displacement) and all EE components were examined. Non-fatiguing lifts were carried out at 50{\%} of a 1-RM for 7, 14 and 21 repetitions. Lifts to failure were carried out at ~37{\%}, ~46{\%}, ~56{\%}, 70{\%}, 80{\%} and 90{\%} of a 1-RM. Individual regression lines were created for fatigue and non-fatigue conditions for each male subject between work and all estimates of EE. The results of our analyses showed that the averaged slopes between fatigue and non-fatigue were proportional for: total EE/work (p = 0.87), anaerobic exercise EE/work, (p= 0.73) and recovery EE/work (p = 0.19). However, the Y-intercepts of the two studies were significantly greater for fatiguing as compared to non-fatiguing lifting for: total EE/work (p = 0.007), anaerobic exercise EE/work (p = 0.001) and recovery EE/work (p = 0.01), but not aerobic exercise EE/work (p = 0.17). For aerobic exercise EE/work, lifting to fatigue had a greater O2 uptake/work slope as compared to lifts that were not completed to fatigue (p = 0.04). We conclude that lifting a weight to muscular failure can entail significantly greater aerobic, anaerobic and recovery EE components as compared to non-fatiguing lifting.",
author = "Scott, {C B} and Earnest, {Conrad P}",
year = "2011",
month = "2",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "1--10",
journal = "Journal of Exercise Physiology Online",
issn = "1097-9751",
publisher = "American Society of Exercise Physiologists",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Resistance exercise energy expenditure is greater with fatigue as compared to non-fatigue

AU - Scott, C B

AU - Earnest, Conrad P

PY - 2011/2

Y1 - 2011/2

N2 - We retrospectively investigated data from two separate studies to estimate and compare aerobic and anaerobic exercise energy expenditure (EE) along with the aerobic recovery EE component for 1-set of resistance exercise. One study was completed using non-fatiguing lifts where the exercise was stopped before muscular failure. In another study muscular failure (fatigue) was the end point of all lifts. Work (weight lifted × upward vertical displacement) and all EE components were examined. Non-fatiguing lifts were carried out at 50% of a 1-RM for 7, 14 and 21 repetitions. Lifts to failure were carried out at ~37%, ~46%, ~56%, 70%, 80% and 90% of a 1-RM. Individual regression lines were created for fatigue and non-fatigue conditions for each male subject between work and all estimates of EE. The results of our analyses showed that the averaged slopes between fatigue and non-fatigue were proportional for: total EE/work (p = 0.87), anaerobic exercise EE/work, (p= 0.73) and recovery EE/work (p = 0.19). However, the Y-intercepts of the two studies were significantly greater for fatiguing as compared to non-fatiguing lifting for: total EE/work (p = 0.007), anaerobic exercise EE/work (p = 0.001) and recovery EE/work (p = 0.01), but not aerobic exercise EE/work (p = 0.17). For aerobic exercise EE/work, lifting to fatigue had a greater O2 uptake/work slope as compared to lifts that were not completed to fatigue (p = 0.04). We conclude that lifting a weight to muscular failure can entail significantly greater aerobic, anaerobic and recovery EE components as compared to non-fatiguing lifting.

AB - We retrospectively investigated data from two separate studies to estimate and compare aerobic and anaerobic exercise energy expenditure (EE) along with the aerobic recovery EE component for 1-set of resistance exercise. One study was completed using non-fatiguing lifts where the exercise was stopped before muscular failure. In another study muscular failure (fatigue) was the end point of all lifts. Work (weight lifted × upward vertical displacement) and all EE components were examined. Non-fatiguing lifts were carried out at 50% of a 1-RM for 7, 14 and 21 repetitions. Lifts to failure were carried out at ~37%, ~46%, ~56%, 70%, 80% and 90% of a 1-RM. Individual regression lines were created for fatigue and non-fatigue conditions for each male subject between work and all estimates of EE. The results of our analyses showed that the averaged slopes between fatigue and non-fatigue were proportional for: total EE/work (p = 0.87), anaerobic exercise EE/work, (p= 0.73) and recovery EE/work (p = 0.19). However, the Y-intercepts of the two studies were significantly greater for fatiguing as compared to non-fatiguing lifting for: total EE/work (p = 0.007), anaerobic exercise EE/work (p = 0.001) and recovery EE/work (p = 0.01), but not aerobic exercise EE/work (p = 0.17). For aerobic exercise EE/work, lifting to fatigue had a greater O2 uptake/work slope as compared to lifts that were not completed to fatigue (p = 0.04). We conclude that lifting a weight to muscular failure can entail significantly greater aerobic, anaerobic and recovery EE components as compared to non-fatiguing lifting.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79551567387&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://faculty.css.edu/tboone2/asep/JEPonlineFebruary2011.html

M3 - Article

VL - 14

SP - 1

EP - 10

JO - Journal of Exercise Physiology Online

JF - Journal of Exercise Physiology Online

SN - 1097-9751

IS - 1

ER -