Back

Increased force and elastic energy storage are not the mechanisms that improve jump performance with accentuated eccentric loading during a constrained vertical jump

Su, E. Y.-S.; Carroll, T. J.; Farris, D.; Lichtwark, G. A.

2023-11-02 biophysics
10.1101/2023.10.30.564851 bioRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveAccentuated eccentric loading (AEL) involves higher load applied during the eccentric phase of a stretch-shortening cycle movement, followed by a sudden removal of load before the concentric phase. Previous studies suggest that AEL enhances human countermovement jump performance, however the mechanism is not fully understood. Here we explore whether isolating additional load during the countermovement is sufficient to increase ground reaction force, and hence elastic energy stored, at the start of the upward movement and whether this leads to increased jump height or power generation. MethodsWe conducted a trunk-constrained vertical jump test on a custom-built device to isolate the effect of additional load while controlling for effects of squat depth, arm swing, and coordination. Twelve healthy, recreationally active adults (7 males, 5 females) performed maximal jumps without AEL, followed by randomised AEL conditions prescribed as a percentage of body mass (10%, 20%, and 30%), before repeating jumps without AEL. Results. No significant changes in vertical ground reaction force at the turning point were observed. High load AEL conditions (20% and 30% body weight) led to slight reductions in jump height, primarily due to decreased hip joint and centre of mass work. AEL conditions did not alter peak or integrated activation levels of the knee extensor muscles. ConclusionThese findings suggest that increased elastic energy return may not be the primary mechanism behind the potentiating effects of AEL on jump performance, and other factors such as rate of descent, squat depth, or body configuration may contribute to effective AEL.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 6%
22.7%
2
Journal of Biomechanics
57 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
17.7%
3
Experimental Physiology
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.5%
50% of probability mass above
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 27%
4.3%
5
European Journal of Applied Physiology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
6
Journal of Orthopaedic Research
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
7
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.3%
8
Journal of Experimental Biology
249 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.4%
9
Journal of Biomechanical Engineering
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.9%
10
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
34 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.8%
11
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
12
Biology Open
130 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.7%
13
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
14
Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology
25 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
15
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.3%
16
Biophysical Journal
545 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
17
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
18
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
19
Bone
22 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
20
European Biophysics Journal
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
21
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
22
Cytoskeleton
23 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
23
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 24%
0.8%
24
Physiological Reports
35 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
25
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living
10 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.6%
26
Integrative Organismal Biology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.5%
27
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
88 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.5%