Cited by 59Muscle activation and electromyography studiesSports Performance and TrainingMuscle Physiology and Disorders

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Contraction type influences the human ability to use the available torque capacity of skeletal muscle during explosive efforts

Open access
Tillin, Neale A., Pain, Matthew T. G., Folland, Jonathan P.·2012·Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

The influence of contraction type on the human ability to use the torque capacity of skeletal muscle during explosive efforts has not been documented. Fourteen male participants completed explosive voluntary contractions of the knee extensors in four separate conditions: concentric (CON) and eccentric (ECC); and isometric at two knee angles (101°, ISO101 and 155°, ISO155). In each condition, torque was measured at 25 ms intervals up to 150 ms from torque onset, and then normalized to the maximum voluntary torque (MVT) specific to that joint angle and angular velocity. Explosive voluntary torque after 50 ms in each condition was also expressed as a percentage of torque generated after 50 ms during a supramaximal 300 Hz electrically evoked octet in the same condition. Explosive voluntary torque normalized to MVT was more than 60 per cent larger in CON than any other condition after the initial 25 ms. The percentage of evoked torque expressed after 50 ms of the explosive voluntary contractions was also greatest in CON (ANOVA; p < 0.001), suggesting higher concentric volitional activation. This was confirmed by greater agonist electromyography normalized to M max (recorded during the explosive voluntary contractions) in CON. These results provide novel evidence that the ability to use the muscle's torque capacity explosively is influenced by contraction type, with concentric contractions being more conducive to explosive performance due to a more effective neural strategy.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rspb.2011.2109

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • RFD is influenced by the muscle group(s) and joint angle(s) at which it is measured.

    “as RFD is known to be influenced by the muscle group(s) and joint angle(s) at which it is measured (Bellumori et al. 2011; de Ruiter et al. 2004; Tillin et al. 2012a).”

    From Rate of force development: physiological and methodological considerations (2016) · cites this paper as Tillin et al. 2012a

    The Discussion (§4b) reports that knee angle affected explosive torque production, supporting the joint-angle part of the claim. The study examines knee extension at different angles, but does not compare RFD across muscle groups, so it does not support that part. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In knee extensor experiments, baseline noise ranges of <0.1% MVC force have been observed with custom-built dynamometers incorporating a strain gauge load cell compared with >1% MVC force with a commercial isokinetic dynamometer.

    “For example, in knee extensor experiments baseline noise ranges of <0.1 % MVC force have been observed with custom-built dynamometers incorporating a strain gauge load cell (de Ruiter et al. 2006; Folland et al. 2014) compared with >1 % MVC force with a commercial isokinetic dynamometer (Tillin et al. 2012a).”

    From Rate of force development: physiological and methodological considerations (2016) · cites this paper as Tillin et al. 2012a

    The Methods (2. Methods; page unavailable) describe knee-extensor experiments using a Con-Trex dynamometer. They report criteria for acceptable baseline torque but do not report a baseline noise range or establish that it exceeded 1% MVC force. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Early-phase RFD can be small, e.g., 2-12% of MVC force.

    “Early-phase (first 25–50 ms) RFD appears important for performance (de Ruiter et al. 2006; Tillin et al. 2010) and injury avoidance (Domire et al. 2011; Krosshaug et al. 2007), yet can be small, e.g., 2–12 % of MVC force (Tillin et al. 2012a).”

    From Rate of force development: physiological and methodological considerations (2016) · cites this paper as Tillin et al. 2012a

  • The greater normalised RFD in concentric contractions appeared attributable to neural mechanisms, as authors measured a greater voluntary:evoked torque ratio and EMG amplitude during the concentric condition.

    “This appeared to be attributable to neural mechanisms as the authors also measured a greater voluntary:evoked torque ratio and EMG amplitude during the concentric condition.”

    From Rate of force development: physiological and methodological considerations (2016) · cites this paper as Tillin et al. 2012a

  • Commercial isokinetic dynamometers are often noisier than strain gauges.

    “Commercial isokinetic dynamometers are often noisier than strain gauges (another reason for using custom-built dynamometers; see Fig. 6).”

    From Rate of force development: physiological and methodological considerations (2016) · cites this paper as Tillin et al. 2012a

    The Methods section describes torque signals from a Con-Trex dynamometer and how they were filtered, but does not compare their noise with strain-gauge measurements. Searches for strain gauges, noise, and custom-built dynamometers found no passage in our copy addressing the claimed comparison. (LLM, conf=0.73)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 32

  1. 10.1152/japplphysiol.00283.2002 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1152/japplphysiol.00230.2004 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181be9c7e · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.1152/jappl.2000.89.6.2249 · DOI
  5. 10.1152/jappl.1990.69.6.2215 · DOI
  6. 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.04.037 · DOI
  7. 10.1007/BF00867932 · DOI
  8. 10.1152/jappl.1997.83.1.40 · DOI
  9. 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.12.012 · DOI
  10. 10.1007/s00421-008-0750-6 · DOI
  11. 10.1152/jappl.1994.76.6.2714 · DOI
  12. 10.1017/S0958067099018953 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.1242/jeb.038588 · DOI
  14. 10.1139/y02-127 · DOI
  15. 10.1113/jphysiol.1969.sp008923 · DOI · Paper page
  16. 10.1152/ajpcell.1980.239.3.C98 · DOI
  17. 10.1002/mus.21885 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.1016/j.jelekin.2005.12.006 · DOI
  19. 10.1123/jab.26.1.62 · DOI
  20. 10.1123/jab.18.3.207 · DOI
  21. 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.11.024 · DOI
  22. 10.1123/jab.22.4.264 · DOI · Paper page
  23. 10.1145/29380.29864 · DOI
  24. 10.1111/j.1748-1716.1976.tb00241.x · DOI
  25. 10.1007/BF00361541 · DOI
  26. 10.1007/s00221-002-1129-2 · DOI
  27. 10.1152/jappl.2001.91.6.2628 · DOI
  28. 10.1007/BF00626764 · DOI
  29. 10.1002/mus.1053 · DOI
  30. 10.1007/s00421-003-1025-x · DOI
  31. 10.2165/00007256-200636080-00001 · DOI
  32. 10.1113/jphysiol.1966.sp007909 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Tillin, N. A., Pain, M. T. G., & Folland, J. P.
Affiliations
Loughborough University (GB)
Corresponding author
Tillin, Neale A.
Venue
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
Published
2012-01-18
Volume
279
Issue
1736
Pages
2106-2115
ISSN
  • 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
  • 0962-8452
  • 1471-2954
OpenAlex
W2165396203
Cited by
59
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Loughborough University Institutional Repository (Loughborough University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Loughborough University Research Repository (Loughborough University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Muscle Physiology and Disorders
Keywords
torque capacity, skeletal muscle, concentric contraction, eccentric contraction, isometric contraction, knee extensors, electrical stimulation, neuromuscular activation, electromyography
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Biomechanical Phenomena, Electric Stimulation, Electromyography, Humans, Isometric Contraction, Knee Joint, Male, Muscle Contraction, Range of Motion, Articular, Muscle, Skeletal, Torque, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review