↓ Skip to main content

The effect of strength training on estimates of mitochondrial density and distribution throughout muscle fibres

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Applied Physiology, October 1999
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
Title
The effect of strength training on estimates of mitochondrial density and distribution throughout muscle fibres
Published in
European Journal of Applied Physiology, October 1999
DOI 10.1007/s004210050641
Pubmed ID
Authors

Philip D. Chilibeck, Daniel G. Syrotuik, Gordon J. Bell

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of strength training (12 weeks, 3 days/week, four lower-body exercises) of young individuals (mean age 23.6 years) on estimates of mitochondrial distribution throughout muscle fibres. A control group (mean age 21. 7 years) was followed simultaneously. Skeletal muscle biopsy samples were obtained from the vastus lateralis, pre- and post-training. The regional distribution of subsarcolemmal and intermyofibrillar mitochondrial populations was determined using quantitative histochemical staining of succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) in type I and II muscle fibres. Strength training resulted in significant increases of 26% and 28% in the cross-sectional area of type I and II fibres, respectively (P < 0.05). Overall SDH activity decreased by 13% with strength training (P < 0.05). The decrease in SDH activity with strength training between fibre types and between subsarcolemmal and intermyofibrillar regions of muscle fibres was not different. Fibre area and SDH activity was unchanged in the control group. We conclude that the muscle hypertrophy associated with strength training results in reduced density of regionally distributed mitochondria, as indicated by the reduction in the activity of SDH.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 2%
Canada 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 79 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 16 19%
Student > Master 14 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 13%
Researcher 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 18 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 24 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 22 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 February 2017.
All research outputs
#6,754,661
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#1,720
of 4,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,358
of 35,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#3
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 35,602 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.