↓ Skip to main content

The Order of Exercise during Concurrent Training for Rehabilitation Does Not Alter Acute Genetic Expression, Mitochondrial Enzyme Activity or Improvements in Muscle Function

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
30 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Order of Exercise during Concurrent Training for Rehabilitation Does Not Alter Acute Genetic Expression, Mitochondrial Enzyme Activity or Improvements in Muscle Function
Published in
PLOS ONE, October 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0109189
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lauren G. MacNeil, Elisa Glover, T. Graham Bergstra, Adeel Safdar, Mark A. Tarnopolsky

Abstract

Concurrent exercise combines different modes of exercise (e.g., aerobic and resistance) into one training protocol, providing stimuli meant to increase muscle strength, aerobic capacity and mass. As disuse is associated with decrements in strength, aerobic capacity and muscle size concurrent training is an attractive modality for rehabilitation. However, interference between the signaling pathways may result in preferential improvements for one of the exercise modes. We recruited 18 young adults (10 ♂, 8 ♀) to determine if order of exercise mode during concurrent training would differentially affect gene expression, protein content and measures of strength and aerobic capacity after 2 weeks of knee-brace induced disuse. Concurrent exercise sessions were performed 3x/week for 6 weeks at gradually increasing intensities either with endurance exercise preceding (END>RES) or following (RES>END) resistance exercise. Biopsies were collected from the vastus lateralis before, 3 h after the first exercise bout and 48 h after the end of training. Concurrent exercise altered the expression of genes involved in mitochondrial biogenesis (PGC-1α, PRC, PPARγ), hypertrophy (PGC-1α4, REDD2, Rheb) and atrophy (MuRF-1, Runx1), increased electron transport chain complex protein content, citrate synthase and mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase enzyme activity, muscle mass, maximum isometric strength and VO 2peak. However, the order in which exercise was completed (END>RES or RES>END) only affected the protein content of mitochondrial complex II subunit. In conclusion, concurrent exercise training is an effective modality for the rehabilitation of the loss of skeletal muscle mass, maximum strength, and peak aerobic capacity resulting from disuse, regardless of the order in which the modes of exercise are performed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 113 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 15%
Student > Bachelor 17 15%
Researcher 12 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 10%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 23 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 41 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 27 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 16 October 2016.
All research outputs
#1,786,865
of 23,485,296 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#22,694
of 201,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,954
of 256,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#568
of 5,277 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,485,296 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 201,120 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 256,560 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,277 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.