Periodized Training in Mice: Comparisons between Constant and Undulating Load Models

Registro completo de metadados
MetadadosDescriçãoIdioma
Autor(es): dc.contributorUniversidade de São Paulo (USP)-
Autor(es): dc.contributorUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)-
Autor(es): dc.creatorde Carvalho, Carlos Dellavechia-
Autor(es): dc.creatorKalva-Filho, Carlos Augusto [UNESP]-
Autor(es): dc.creatorMilioni, Fabio [UNESP]-
Autor(es): dc.creatorLoures, João Paulo-
Autor(es): dc.creatorSerrano, Vitor Siqueira-
Autor(es): dc.creatorSilva, Adelino Sanchez Ramos-
Autor(es): dc.creatorPapoti, Marcelo-
Data de aceite: dc.date.accessioned2022-02-22T00:51:50Z-
Data de disponibilização: dc.date.available2022-02-22T00:51:50Z-
Data de envio: dc.date.issued2021-06-25-
Data de envio: dc.date.issued2021-06-25-
Data de envio: dc.date.issued2020-08-01-
Fonte completa do material: dc.identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/207930-
Fonte: dc.identifier.urihttp://educapes.capes.gov.br/handle/11449/207930-
Descrição: dc.descriptionCarvalho CD, Kalva-Filho CA, Milioni F, Loures JP, Serrano VS, Silva ASR, Papoti M. Periodized Training in Mice: Comparisons between Constant and Undulating Load Models. JEPonline 2020;23(4):15-24. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of undulating (UL) and constant load (CL) training models applied in Swiss mice. Twenty male mice were divided into 3 groups: (a) Control Group [CON; n=6]; (b) Undulating Group [ULG; n=7]; and (c) Constant Load Group [CLG; n=7]. Both training periods lasted 8 wks, 5 d∙wk-1, as prescribed in accordance with maximal speed reached during the incremental test (MaxS). The ULG trained through sessions classified as Endurance 1 (60 min at 40% MaxS), Endurance 2 (30 min at 60% MaxS), Endurance 3 (4 x 5 min at 100% MaxS), and Anaerobic (10 x 1 min at 120% MaxS). All sessions for CLG consisted of a 60-min duration at 60% of MaxS. Both training models induced positive adaptations until the 4th wk of training. However, these adaptations were not maintained during the last 4 wks, declining MaxS in relation to baseline. The CLG was able to accomplish only 69% of proposed training volume. However, the ULG was able to accomplish 94% of the proposed volume. Comparing the reasons for sessions failure, CLG presented higher number of dropouts related to unsatisfactory running (P-value = 0.008) and exhaustion (P-value = 0.001), while the ULG quit the sessions mainly due to injuries (P-value = 0.003). These results demonstrate that independently of the training model used, positive adaptations were induced up to the 4th-wk of training with high intensity sessions producing the larger amount of dropouts due primarily to injuries.-
Descrição: dc.descriptionFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)-
Descrição: dc.descriptionSchool of Physical Education and Sport of Ribeirão Preto University of São Paulo-
Descrição: dc.descriptionPhysical Education School of Sciences São Paulo State University (Unesp)-
Descrição: dc.descriptionPostgraduate Program in Rehabilitation and Functional Performance Ribeirão Preto Medical School University of São Paulo (USP)-
Descrição: dc.descriptionPhysical Education School of Sciences São Paulo State University (Unesp)-
Descrição: dc.descriptionFAPESP: FAPESP/n◦2014/19627-6-
Formato: dc.format15-24-
Idioma: dc.languageen-
Relação: dc.relationJournal of Exercise Physiology Online-
???dc.source???: dc.sourceScopus-
Palavras-chave: dc.subjectAerobic Training-
Palavras-chave: dc.subjectMaximal Speed-
Palavras-chave: dc.subjectMice-
Palavras-chave: dc.subjectRunning-
Título: dc.titlePeriodized Training in Mice: Comparisons between Constant and Undulating Load Models-
Tipo de arquivo: dc.typelivro digital-
Aparece nas coleções:Repositório Institucional - Unesp

Não existem arquivos associados a este item.