Journal of Applied Physiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Appl Physiol 85: 695-700, 1998;
8750-7587/98 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dolezal, B. A.
Right arrow Articles by Potteiger, J. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dolezal, B. A.
Right arrow Articles by Potteiger, J. A.
Vol. 85, Issue 2, 695-700, August 1998

Concurrent resistance and endurance training influence basal metabolic rate in nondieting individuals

Brett A. Dolezal and Jeffrey A. Potteiger

Exercise Physiology Laboratory, Department of Health, Sport, and Exercise Sciences, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas 66045-2348

Thirty physically active healthy men (20.1 ± 1.6 yr) were randomly assigned to participate for 10 wk in one of the following training groups: endurance trained (ET; 3 days/wk jogging and/or running), resistance trained (RT; 3 days/wk resistance training), or combined endurance and resistance trained (CT). Before and after training, basal metabolic rate (BMR), percent body fat (BF), maximal aerobic power, and one-repetition maximum for bench press and parallel squat were determined for each subject. Urinary urea nitrogen was determined pre-, mid-, and posttraining. BMR increased significantly from pre- to posttraining for RT (7,613 ± 968 to 8,090 ± 951 kJ/day) and CT (7,455 ± 964 to 7,802 ± 981 kJ/day) but not for ET (7,231 ± 554 to 7,029 ± 666 kJ/day). BF for CT (12.2 ± 3.5 to 8.7 ± 1.7%) was significantly reduced compared with RT (15.4 ± 2.7 to 14.0 ± 2.7%) and ET (11.8 ± 2.9 to 9.5 ± 1.7%). Maximal aerobic power increased significantly for ET (13%) but not RT (-0.2%) or CT (7%), whereas the improvements in one-repetition maximum bench press and parallel squat were greater in RT (24 and 23%, respectively) compared with CT (19 and 12%, respectively). Urinary urea nitrogen loss was greater in ET (14.6 ± 0.9 g/24 h) than in RT (11.7 ± 1.0 g/24 h) and CT (11.5 ± 1.0 g/24 h) at the end of 10 wk of training. These data indicate that, although RT alone will increase BMR and muscular strength, and ET alone will increase aerobic power and decrease BF, CT will provide all of these benefits but to a lesser magnitude than RT and ET after 10 wk of training.

metabolism; exercise; energy expenditure; urinary urea nitrogen; weight loss


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Am. Coll. Nutr.Home page
J. W. Rankin, L. P. Goldman, M. J. Puglisi, S. M. Nickols-Richardson, C. P. Earthman, and F. C. Gwazdauskas
Effect of Post-Exercise Supplement Consumption on Adaptations to Resistance Training
J. Am. Coll. Nutr., August 1, 2004; 23(4): 322 - 330.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online