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
 |
ABSTRACT |
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
| |
INTRODUCTION |
WHEN ENERGY EXPENDITURE exceeds energy intake, a
negative energy balance exists and body mass is reduced. The energy
expenditure side of the energy balance equation, especially those
factors affecting a person's basal metabolic rate (BMR), has been
given considerable attention in the literature. Given that BMR
represents the largest percentage of an individual's daily energy
expenditure (~60-75% of total energy expenditure), many
researchers have been interested in identifying interventions that may
potentiate an increase in BMR (26) and resting metabolic rate (RMR) to
facilitate weight loss (14). Typically, endurance exercise has been
used for altering body composition because of its ability to increase energy expenditure and fat utilization. However, the results of previous studies examining the effects of endurance training on BMR and
RMR are equivocal. The results of some investigations have shown
increases in RMR (1, 4, 30), whereas the results of other studies
indicate that BMR is unaltered (26) or RMR is decreased slightly (28)
by endurance training.
Many factors have been shown to influence metabolic rate. The strongest
correlation exists between an individual's fat-free mass (FFM) and
BMR. It has been proposed that increases in lean body mass will
increase BMR, thus increasing total energy expenditure (19). Fat mass
(FM) and total body mass (TM) are generally reduced with endurance
exercise; however, this reduction contributes minimally to gains in
lean body mass (29). Much of the research centering on increases in
lean body mass have used resistance training as the exercise modality.
The potential influence on BMR and body composition that resistance and
endurance exercise may offer to individuals warrants further
investigation.
Recently, concurrent resistance and endurance exercise has received
much attention as a form of training. Many of the past investigations
have examined similar variables including maximal aerobic power
(
O2 max), isotonic and
isokinetic strength, and body composition. Moreover, they have
demonstrated that the impact of concurrent training appears to be more
detrimental to potential strength gains (5, 8, 9, 13, 18, 23) and not
aerobic power (2, 5, 8, 9, 13, 15, 16, 22, 23). Additionally, after
concurrent resistance and endurance training, investigators have noted
positive changes in body composition including decreases in FM and body
fat (BF) percent and increases in FFM. To our knowledge, no studies
exist that have addressed the influence of concurrent resistance and
endurance training on BMR in nondieting individuals. Many individuals
participate in concurrent resistance- and endurance-training programs,
yet limited information is known about the effect of this type of training on metabolic rate. Therefore, the purpose of this
study was to examine the influence of concurrent resistance and
endurance training on BMR, body composition,
O2 max, muscular
strength, and urinary urea nitrogen excretion.
| |
METHODS |
Subjects.
Thirty physically active men (20.1 ± 1.6 yr) participated in the
study. All methods and procedures were approved by the University Committee for Human Experimentation. Subjects read and signed the
subject consent form and medical history questionnaire before beginning
the study. Inclusionary criteria were
1) training for at least 3 days/wk
for at least 1 yr, 2)
O2 max 
40
ml · kg
1 · min1,
and 3) BF between 9 and 20%.
Subjects were randomly assigned to one of three experimental groups: an
endurance-trained group (ET, n = 10),
a resistance-trained group (RT, n = 10), and a combined endurance- and resistance-trained group (CT,
n = 10). During the initial visit to
the laboratory, subjects were familiarized with the equipment and
experimental procedures. Subjects then completed the following tests in
a 24-h period before and after the 10-wk training period.
BMR.
Indirect calorimetry was used to measure BMR. All subjects had 8 h of
sleep, did not perform any exercise for 48 h before each session, and
did not eat or consume any liquids, except water, for 12 h before
testing. Each subject was transported by motor vehicle to the testing
site to ensure minimal activity before BMR determination. All BMR
measurements were performed between 0600 and 0800.
After entering the laboratory, subjects rested in a supine position for
30 min. A Hans Rudolph flow-by face mask (Kansas City, MO) was
positioned on the subject. Oxygen uptake was monitored continuously for
20 min by a SensorMedics 2900 Metabolic Measurement cart. The system
was calibrated before testing by using gases of known concentration,
whereas the flowmeter was calibrated by using a 3-liter syringe. During
the test, the room was darkened, and noise was kept to a minimum. The
subjects were instructed to remain awake, quiet, and motionless before
and throughout the entire 20-min period. The average of the last 15 min
of the measurement period was used as the measure of BMR.
Body composition analysis.
Hydrostatic weighing was performed to determine body density. To
determine TM, the subjects, wearing only a swimsuit, were weighed on a
calibrated digital scale. Five measures of underwater weight were
collected with the average of the last three measures used as the mean
value for analysis. Residual lung volume was measured by using a
percentage of total lung capacity (21). The Siri equation (25) was used
to calculate percent BF, with FFM and FM calculated accordingly.
O2 max.
Subjects completed a graded exercise test to exhaustion on a
motor-driven treadmill. The test began with a 4-min warm-up period followed by an increase of speed or grade every 2 min until a treadmill
grade of 10% was achieved. Thereafter, only the treadmill speed was
increased until each subject reached volitional exhaustion. Expired air
was measured continuously for oxygen and carbon dioxide concentrations
by using a calibrated SensorMedics 2900 Metabolic Measurement cart.
O2 max was defined as
that point at which 1) the oxygen
consumption reached a plateau (change of <2.0
ml · kg1 · min1)
with an increase in workload and 2)
the respiratory exchange ratio was 1.10.
Determination of maximal strength.
Subjects underwent strength testing for the determination of the
one-repetition maximum (1-RM) by using Olympic-style free weights. Each
subject was tested for 1-RM on the bench press and parallel squat by
using previously described methods (27).
Urinary urea nitrogen analysis.
During pre-, mid-, and posttesting, and at least 24 h after their last
exercise bout, each subject was required to make a 24-h urine
collection and to preserve the collections in a refrigerator until
delivery to the laboratory. Urine volume was recorded, and aliquots of
each day's urine sample were stored at 70°C until analysis
for urea nitrogen with the use of Sigma Chemical kit no. 640B (St.
Louis, MO). All samples were analyzed in duplicate by using standard
spectrophotometric techniques, with the average of the duplicate values
used in statistical analysis.
Three-day nutritional intake.
Each subject completed a 3-day dietary diary before testing, during
week 5, and during
week 10 of the training period.
Subjects were provided with examples of food samples, written
guidelines, and a record booklet for keeping track of food intake.
Recording days were randomly assigned; however, the recalls always
included 1 weekend day and 2 weekdays. The Nutritionist III software
program (N-Squared Computing, Salem, OR) was used to analyze dietary
composition for daily total caloric intake and the percentage of energy
nutrients.
Training program.
After completing all pretesting, each subject participated for 10 wk in
ET, RT, or CT. Subjects trained 3 days/wk on alternate days. Individual
training programs were designed to produce marked improvements in
either strength or aerobic power. All training was periodically
monitored by an investigator.
Each subject in the ET group participated in a jogging and/or
running program. Subjects gradually increased exercise duration and
intensity so that a training goal was reached every 2 wk. At
weeks 1-2, subjects exercised for
25 min at 65% of age-derived maximum heart rate
(HRmax), at
weeks 3-6 for 35 min at
65-75% of HRmax, and at
weeks 7-10 for 40 min at
75-85% of HRmax. A
telemetric heart-rate monitor (Polar) was available to all subjects to
accurately determine exercise intensity. Subjects were instructed to
palpate the radial artery for determination of heart rate when
telemetry units were unavailable.
Subjects in RT performed resistance training using a combination of
Olympic free weights and Universal machines. The program was divided
into upper-body exercises (performed on Monday), lower-body exercises
(performed on Wednesday), and both upper- and lower-body exercises
(performed on Friday). The resistance-training program involved all
major muscle groups and included the following exercises: bench press,
lat pulldown, shoulder press, bicep curl, tricep pushdown,
back squat, leg extension, leg curl, clean pulls, incline dumbbell
press, leg press, seated row, and upright row. During the first 2 wk of
the program, subjects performed 10-15 repetitions per set, with
three sets per exercise. The resistance was established so that the
subject became fatigued at 10-15 repetitions. Fatigue was defined
as the point at which the exercise could not be executed correctly
through its full range of motion. During the final 8 wk, exercises were
performed with the resistance established for each set so that failure
to lift the weight occurred at 10-12 repetitions on the first set,
8-10 repetitions on the second set, and 4-8 repetitions on
the third set.
Subjects in the CT group participated in a summation of the exact same
endurance- and resistance-training programs outlined above. For CT,
endurance and resistance training were performed on the same days of
the week, with resistance training always completed first.
Statistical analysis.
The magnitude of changes for each dependent variable produced by
training in the three groups was compared by using a one-way ANOVA on
the difference (posttest minus pretest) scores. Post hoc Tukey honestly
significant difference comparisons were performed when
significant F-ratios were found.
Urinary urea nitrogen and dietary intake were analyzed by a
repeated-measures ANOVA. Within-group differences from baseline to
week 10 were analyzed for all
variables by using Student's t-test.
A Pearson correlational analysis between changes in body composition
and RMR was performed. Significance was set at
P 
0.05. All values are reported as
means ± SD.
| |
RESULTS |
The BMR results for the pre- and posttraining measurement periods are
presented in Table 1. Pretraining values
for BMR (in kJ/day, kJ · kg
TM1 · h1,
and kJ · kg
FFM1 · h1)
were not significantly different among groups. The RT and CT groups
showed significant increases in BMR (expressed in kJ/day and
kJ · kg
TM1 · h1)
from baseline to week 10, compared
with ET, whereas the ET group significantly decreased in BMR (expressed
in kJ/day) from baseline to week 10. A
significant correlation was observed between the changes in BMR
(expressed in kJ/day) and FFM and is presented in Fig.
1 (r = 0.74, P < 0.01).
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Relationship shown between change in fat-free mass and change in basal
metabolic rate (BMR) after 10 wk of resistance, endurance, or
concurrent training for n = 30 subjects.
|
|
The body composition results for the pre- and posttraining measurements
are presented in Table 2. All groups showed
significant decreases in BF from baseline to week
10. Comparison among groups showed a significantly
greater decrease for BF and FM for the CT group (3.5 ± 1.8%
and 2.6 ± 1.8 kg, respectively) than for the RT and ET
groups (RT: 1.4 ± 0.1% and 0.8 ± 0.2 kg, ET:
2.3 ± 1.2% and 2.0 ± 1.1 kg, respectively). Both
the ET and CT groups showed significant decreases in FM from baseline
to week 10. The RT and CT groups
significantly increased in FFM from baseline to week
10 (by 2.7 ± 0.4 kg and 3.2 ± 0.9 kg,
respectively) and were significantly higher compared with the ET group
(1.4 ± 0.9 kg) at week 10.
The O2 max and 1-RM
results for the pre- and posttraining measurement periods are presented
in Table 3. The ET group
significantly improved in
O2 max from baseline to
week 10 (by 13%), and, although O2 max increased in the
CT group (by 7%) after training, this value was not statistically
significant from baseline. Both the RT and CT groups significantly
increased strength from baseline to week
10. For the 1-RM squat, significant increases in both the RT (23%) and CT (19%) groups occurred, whereas the ET group did
not change (0.7%). For the 1-RM bench press, the RT group significantly increased the most (24%), and the CT group improved to a
lesser degree (12%), whereas the ET group did not change (0.4%).
Figure 2 illustrates the urinary urea
nitrogen for the pre-, mid-, and posttraining measurements in each
group. No significant differences in RT and CT groups from pre- to mid-
and from mid- to posttraining were observed. The ET group did show a
significant increase in urinary urea nitrogen from pre- to mid- and
from mid- to posttraining. Both the mid- and posttraining urinary urea
nitrogen measurements for the ET group were significantly higher than
for the RT and CT groups.
View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Urinary urea nitrogen values pre-, mid-, and posttraining. Subjects
participated in resistance, endurance, or concurrent exercise training
for 10 wk. * Significantly different from pretraining
(P < 0.001);
# significantly different
from resistance- and concurrent-training groups
(P < 0.001).
|
|
Results from the 3-day dietary diary are illustrated in Table
4. There were no significant changes in
each group's normal dietary patterns among measurement periods (pre-
to mid- and mid- to posttraining).
| |
DISCUSSION |
BMR and body composition.
This study is believed to be the first to examine the influence of
concurrent resistance and endurance training on BMR in individuals on
an ad libitum diet. The results of this study indicate that absolute
BMR (kJ/day) and BMR expressed as kJ · kg
TM1 · h1
increased significantly over the 10-wk training period for RT and CT
groups; however, the differences between the two groups were not
significant. The ET group significantly decreased absolute BMR (kJ/day)
over the 10-wk training period. Figure 3
represents the change values in BMR (kJ/day) among the groups.
View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Change in BMR (kJ/day) for resistance, endurance, and concurrent
exercise training groups. * Significantly different from
endurance-training group (P < 0.001).
|
|
We were only able to identify one study in which individuals were
measured for RMR while concurrently training for 12 wk. Whatley et al.
(30) concluded that a large volume of endurance exercise in combination
with resistance training added to a very-low-energy diet may improve
body mass and BF losses in obese females. Nonetheless, Whatley et al.
were unable to ascertain that combined endurance and resistance
training exerted a positive effect on RMR and preserved FFM. In our
study, concurrently training for 10 wk induced favorable body mass
changes as well as increases in BMR, both of which may aid in weight
management.
A strong relationship was found between the changes in FFM and BMR
during the 10 wk of training. When all three groups were collapsed
together, a significant correlation existed between the changes in pre-
to posttraining values for FFM and BMR
(r = 0.74, P < 0.01). These findings are in
agreement with reports that FFM has been shown to be the major
intrinsic determinant of BMR (3, 26, 29). Pratley et al. (21) found
that resistance training in healthy older men increased BMR, and this
was accompanied by an increase in FFM. The intense, periodized
resistance training completed by the RT and CT groups in our study most
likely promoted skeletal muscle hypertrophy, which elevated BMR by
increasing the total amount of metabolically active tissue (i.e., FFM).
It has been demonstrated that, whereas the increase in BMR with
resistance training can be accounted for by concomitant increases in
FFM, elevations in BMR found with endurance training appear to be
partially mediated by an increase in the rate of activity per kilogram
of tissue (29). However, in this study, when BMR was normalized to FFM
(kJ · kg
FFM1 · h1),
there were no significant improvements in BMR for any of the three
groups, and in fact there was a slight, nonsignificant decrease found
in the ET group. This finding is not consistent with many of the
theories that have been proposed as to the mechanism of exercise-induced increases in BMR per FFM. Those theories include increases in the concentration of metabolic hormones (e.g., cortisol, catecholamines, and thyroid hormone), increased activity of various enzymatic reactions and shuttle systems, increased substrate flux, repair of exercise-induced trauma, and increased protein synthesis (1,
19).
We speculate that the absolute increases in BMR (kJ/day) found in the
RT and CT groups and the decrease in BMR found in the ET group may
simply reflect gains and losses in FFM, respectively. Even though there
was a nonsignificant decline in FFM for the ET group over the 10-wk
study, we believe that the decline in BMR could still have been
attributed to losses in FFM. This was evidenced by the ET group's
elevation in urinary urea nitrogen over the 10-wk study (Fig. 2).
Fluctuations in FFM can be followed by the measurement of changes in
urinary urea nitrogen. Because urea is the major nitrogen-containing
metabolic product of protein catabolism in humans, as FFM is degraded
there is a release of nitrogen-derived ammonia that causes urinary urea
nitrogen to become elevated (24). Although urinary urea nitrogen levels did not significantly increase after consecutive days of jogging, Kolkhorst et al. (14) noted that overall nitrogen balance decreased after exercise, inferring a greater breakdown of FFM. In a clinical study of recovering coronary artery bypass graft surgery patients, Shaw
et al. (24) showed increases in urinary urea nitrogen accompanying the
loss of FFM after the initial days of bed rest. Similarly, elevated
urinary urea nitrogen levels in the ET group in our study were
consistent with a nonsignificant loss of FFM; and we believe that this
decrease in FFM could have partially explained the concomitant decrease
in BMR.
With respect to other body compositional changes, all three groups
decreased BF over the 10 wk of training, and only the ET and CT groups
reduced FM. Melby et al. (17) speculated that strenuous resistive
exercise could be beneficial in weight control, not only because of the
direct caloric cost of the exercise and acute residual elevation of
BMR, but also because of greater postexercise fat oxidation. Although
our RT group did show a nonsignificant decrease in FM over the 10 wk,
when endurance training was combined (the CT group), the drop in FM and
BF became significant. This larger weight loss may have been due to a
greater amount of work (e.g., resistance and endurance training
compared with resistance training alone), and, similar to what Whatley
et al. (30) hypothesized in their study, the additional energy cost of
exercise may have been met by an increase in fat oxidation.
Muscular strength and aerobic power.
The results of the present study and those of others (2, 5, 8-13,
15, 16, 18, 22, 23) indicate that concurrently training for strength
and endurance induces increases in muscular strength and aerobic power.
However, the increases in aerobic power and muscular strength of those
subjects performing concurrent training were of lesser magnitude than
those induced by endurance and resistance training alone, respectively.
Additionally, performance of only endurance training did not increase
muscular strength, whereas resistance training improved muscular
strength but not aerobic power.
Whereas researchers have proposed that simultaneous training appears to
compromise strength improvement more so than endurance improvement when
both modes of training engage the same muscle groups (5,
8, 13, 18, 23), it was interesting to find that in this study the
reverse was true. That is, the improvement in
O2 max was compromised
more than the improvements in lower-body strength for the CT group. The
attenuated improvements found in O2 max of the CT group,
when compared with endurance training alone, could be explained by
interferences found in strength-training adaptations, which may include
muscle fiber hypertrophy and increases in contractile proteins with
associated decreases in capillary and mitochondrial volume densities
(2, 9, 16, 22). Conversely, the theory that endurance training may
impede strength development by promoting increases in capillary
density, mitochondrial volume density, oxidative enzyme activity, and
decreases in muscle fiber size (2, 9, 16, 22) was not consistent with
our data.
In summary, the findings of this study show that 10 wk of concurrent
resistance and endurance training have beneficial effects on energy
expenditure and weight loss. Whereas single-mode training, such as
endurance or resistance training, has been shown extensively to
increase aerobic capacity and muscular strength, respectively, in this
study concurrent training was shown to increase both of these traits
together, although to a lesser magnitude. Moreover, whereas resistance
training alone induced an increase in FFM with a concomitant increase
in RMR, and endurance training alone induced losses in BF and FM,
concurrent training shared all of these benefits, thereby providing for
the most effective exercise program strategy when weight loss is
desired.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
The authors thank all of the subjects who gave their time and
effort and thank Matt Comeau, Rhonda Stein, Mark Haub, Cynthia Schroeder, Greg Haff, and Chris Thompson for assistance with data collection.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
This study was supported by a Student Research Grant from the National
Strength and Conditioning Association.
Address for reprint requests: J. A. Potteiger, Dept. of Health, Sport,
and Exercise Sciences, 101 Robinson Center, Lawrence, KS 66045-2348 (E-mail: japott{at}ukans.edu).
Received 8 September 1997; accepted in final form 13 April 1998.
| |
REFERENCES |
1.
Ballor, D. L.,
and
E. T. Poehlman.
Resting metabolic rate and coronary-heart-disease risk factors in aerobically and resistance-trained women.
Am. J. Clin. Nutr.
56:
968-974,
1992[Abstract/Free Full Text].
2.
Bell, G. J.,
S. R. Petersen,
J. Wessel,
K. Bagnall,
and
H. A. Quinney.
Physiological adaptations to concurrent endurance training and low velocity resistance training.
Int. J. Sports Med.
12:
384-390,
1991[Medline].
3.
Bogardus, C.,
S. Lillioja,
E. Ravussin,
W. Abbott,
J. K. Zawadzki,
A. Young,
W. C. Knowler,
R. Jacobowitz,
and
P. P. Moll.
Familial dependence of the resting metabolic rate.
N. Engl. J. Med.
315:
96-100,
1986[Abstract].
4.
Broeder, C. E.,
K. A. Burrhus,
L. S. Svanevik,
and
J. H. Wilmore.
The effects of either high-intensity resistance or endurance training on resting metabolic rate.
Am. J. Clin. Nutr.
55:
802-810,
1992[Abstract/Free Full Text].
5.
Dudley, G. A.,
and
R. Djamil.
Incompatibility of endurance and strength training modes of exercise.
J. Appl. Physiol.
59:
1446-1451,
1985[Abstract/Free Full Text].
6.
Dudley, G. A.,
and
S. J. Fleck.
Strength and endurance training: are they mutually exclusive?
Sports Med.
4:
79-85,
1987[Medline].
7.
Fleck, S. J.,
and
W. J. Kraemer.
Resistance training: physiological responses and adaptations.
Physician Sportsmed.
16:
108-124,
1988.
8.
Hennessy, L. C.,
and
A. W. S. Watson.
The interference effects of training for strength and endurance simultaneously.
J. Strength Cond. Res.
8:
12-19,
1994.
9.
Hickson, R. C.
Interference of strength development by simultaneously training for strength and endurance.
Eur. J. Appl. Physiol.
45:
255-269,
1980.
10.
Hickson, R. C.,
B. A. Dvorak,
E. M. Gorostiga,
T. T. Kurowski,
and
C. Foster.
Potential for strength and endurance training to amplify endurance performance.
J. Appl. Physiol.
65:
2285-2290,
1988[Abstract/Free Full Text].
11.
Hickson, R. C.,
M. A. Rosenkoetter,
and
M. M. Brown.
Strength training effects on aerobic power and short term endurance.
Med. Sci. Sports Exerc.
12:
336-339,
1980[Medline].
12.
Hortobagyi, T.,
F. I. Katch,
and
P. F. LaChance.
Effects of simultaneous training for strength and endurance on upper and lower body strength and running performance.
J. Sports Med. Phys. Fitness
31:
20-30,
1991[Medline].
13.
Hunter, G.,
R. Demment,
and
D. Miller.
Development of strength and maximum oxygen uptake during simultaneous training for strength and endurance.
J. Sports Med. Phys. Fitness
27:
269-275,
1987[Medline].
14.
Kolkhorst, F. W.,
B. R. Londeree,
and
T. R. Thomas.
Effects of consecutive exercise days of jogging or cycling on the resting metabolic rate and nitrogen balance.
J. Sports Med. Phys. Fitness
34:
343-350,
1994[Medline].
15.
Kraemer, W. J.,
J. F. Patton,
S. E. Gordon,
E. A. Haraman,
M. R. Deschenes,
K. Reynolds,
R. U. Newton,
N. T. Triplett,
and
J. E. Dziados.
Compatibility of high-intensity strength and endurance training on hormonal and skeletal muscle adaptations.
J. Appl. Physiol.
78:
976-989,
1995[Abstract/Free Full Text].
16.
McCarthy, J. P.,
J. C. Agre,
B. K. Graf,
M. A. Pozniak,
and
A. C. Vailas.
Compatibility of adaptive responses with combining strength and endurance training.
Med. Sci. Sports Exerc.
27:
429-436,
1995[Medline].
17.
Melby, C.,
C. Scholl,
G. Edwards,
and
R. Bullough.
Effect of acute resistance exercise on postexercise energy expenditure and resting metabolic rate.
J. Appl. Physiol.
75:
1847-1853,
1993[Abstract/Free Full Text].
18.
Nelson, G. A.,
D. A. Arnell,
S. F. Loy,
L. J. Silvester,
and
R. K. Conlee.
Consequences of combining strength and endurance training regimens.
Phys. Ther.
70:
287-294,
1990[Abstract/Free Full Text].
19.
Poehlman, E. T.
A review: exercise and its influence on resting energy metabolism in man.
Med. Sci. Sports Exerc.
21:
515-525,
1989[Medline].
20.
Pollock, M. L.,
L. Garzarella,
and
J. E. Graves.
The measurement of body composition.
In: Physiological Assessment of Human Fitness, edited by P. J. Maud,
and C. Foster. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1995, p. 167-204.
21.
Pratley, R.,
B. Nicklas,
M. Rubin,
J. Miller,
A. Smith,
M. Smith,
B. Hurley,
and
A. Goldberg.
Strength training increases resting metabolic rate and norepinephrine levels in healthy 50- to 65-yr-old men.
J. Appl. Physiol.
76:
133-137,
1994[Abstract/Free Full Text].
22.
Sale, D. G.,
I. Jacobs,
J. D. MacDougall,
and
S. Garner.
Comparison of two regimens of concurrent strength and endurance training.
Med. Sci. Sports Exerc.
22:
348-356,
1990[Medline].
23.
Sale, D. G.,
J. D. MacDougall,
I. Jacobs,
and
S. Garner.
Interaction between concurrent strength and endurance training.
J. Appl. Physiol.
68:
260-270,
1990[Abstract/Free Full Text].
24.
Shaw, D. K.,
D. T. Deutsch,
P. M. Schall,
and
R. J. Bowling.
Physical activity and lean body mass loss following coronary artery bypass graft surgery.
J. Sports Med. Phys. Fitness
31:
67-74,
1991[Medline].
25.
Siri, W. E.
Body composition from fluid spaces and density.
In: Techniques for Measuring Body Composition, edited by J. Brozek,
and A. Henschel. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences, 1961, p. 223-244.
26.
Sjodin, A. M.,
A. H. Forslund,
K. R. Westerterp,
A. B. Andersson,
J. M. Forslund,
and
L. M. Hambraeus.
The influence of physical activity on BMR.
Med. Sci. Sports Exerc.
28:
85-91,
1996[Medline].
27.
Stone, M. H.,
K. Pierce,
R. Goosen,
G. D. Wilson,
D. Blessing,
R. Rozenek,
and
J. Chromiak.
Heart rate and lactate levels during weight training exercise in trained and untrained men.
Physician Sportsmed.
15:
97-105,
1987.
28.
Thompson, J. L.,
M. M. Manore,
and
J. R. Thomas.
Effects of diet and diet-plus-exercise programs on resting metabolic rate: a meta-analysis.
Int. J. Sport Nutr.
6:
41-61,
1996[Medline].
29.
Weinsier, R. L.,
Y. Schutz,
and
D. Bracco.
Reexamination of the relationship of resting metabolic rate to fat-free mass and to the metabolically active components of fat-free mass in humans.
Am. J. Clin. Nutr.
55:
790-794,
1992[Abstract/Free Full Text].
30.
Whatley, J. E.,
W. J. Gillespie,
J. Honig,
M. J. Walsh,
A. L. Blackburn,
and
G. L. Blackburn.
Does the amount of endurance exercise in combination with weight training and a very-low-energy diet affect resting metabolic rate and body composition?
Am. J. Clin. Nutr.
59:
1088-1092,
1994[Abstract/Free Full Text].
J APPL PHYSIOL 85(2):695-700
8570-7587/98 $5.00
Copyright © 1998 the American Physiological Society
Top
Abstract
Introduction
