Share this article on:

Muscular Performance after Concentric and Eccentric Exercise in Trained Men


Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise: October 2006 - Volume 38 - Issue 10 - p 1770-1781
doi: 10.1249/01.mss.0000229568.17284.ab
BASIC SCIENCES: Original Investigations

Purpose: We studied previously resistance-trained men and compared the effects of concentric and eccentric training on performance and structural muscle parameters.

Methods: Seventeen trained individuals (age 26.9 ± 3.4 yr) participated in 12 wk of either maximum concentric (N = 8) or eccentric (N = 9) resistance training of the elbow flexors. The functional performance was measured as the maximum concentric and eccentric strength and angular velocity at standard loads. Muscle cross-sectional area and cross-sectional area of single cells were used as measures of muscular hypertrophy. Fiber-type proportions were assessed by staining cells for myofibrillar ATPase.

Results: Both eccentric and concentric training increased concentric strength to a similar extent (14 vs 18%), whereas eccentric training led to greater increases in eccentric strength than concentric training did (26 vs 9%). The maximum angular velocity at all loads was enhanced equally in both training groups. The cross-sectional area of both the elbow flexors (+11%) and of the type I and type IIA fibers increased only after the eccentric training. In addition, the relative cross-sectional area occupied by the type II fibers increased from 64 to 73% after the eccentric training. There were only minor changes in the fiber-type proportions.

Conclusion: The present data suggest that for resistance-trained men, increases in concentric strength and velocity performance after eccentric training are largely mediated by changes in fiber and muscle cross-sectional area. However, hypertrophy alone could not explain the increase in eccentric strength. Because the increases in strength and velocity performance after concentric training could not be ascribed to muscular adaptations alone, we suggest that they may be attributable to additional neural factors.

1Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Oslo, NORWAY; 2Department of Molecular Biosciences, University of Oslo, NORWAY; 3Norwegian Olympic Sports Centre, Oslo, NORWAY; 4National Institute of Occupational Health, Oslo, NORWAY; and 5Department of Anatomy and the CMBN, University of Oslo, NORWAY

Address for correspondence: Kristian Gundersen, Ph.D., Department of Molecular Biosciences, Program of General Physiology, University of Oslo, Box 1041 Blindern, N-0316 Oslo, Norway; E-mail:

Submitted for publication June 2005.

Accepted for publication May 2006.

©2006The American College of Sports Medicine