Vibration Cycling Did Not Affect Energy Demands Compared to Normal Cycling During Maximal Graded Test

The aim of this study was to compare the physiological responses between a vibration induced cycling step protocol (Vib) and normal cycling (without vibration, no-Vib). Eighteen moderate trained males (age 24.1 ± 4.3 years; weight 76.5 ± 10.5 kg; height 178.0 ± 6.4 cm) have participated in this study. They randomly performed two gradual maximal exercise tests on two separate days using a new bike that automatically induces vibration cycling and the Corival cycle ergometer. The choice of two different bikes was made because of the impossibility to recreate the same power output without altering the cycling cadence on the vibration Bike. Both protocols were matched for power output and cycling cadence incrementations. Oxygen uptake (VO2), carbon dioxide production (VCO2), ventilation (VE), heart rate (HR), blood lactate and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) during each stage were continuously recorded. No statistical differences were founded for all variables when comparing the Vib to no-Vib trials, except a higher ventilation during the vibration trial at submaximal levels. The results of this study do not confirm those of previous studies stated that Vib increased metabolic demands during cycling exercise. Added vibration stimulus to an incremental cycling protocol does not affect physiological parameters.We would like to thank all the participants who took part in this investigation. A particular thank to Mr. Emanuele Gariffo who has substantially helped in the data collection. Also, our thank goes to the Sport Science Department at Greenwich University, London, United Kingdom, that logistically supported the study together with K. C. Wong Magna Fund at Ningbo University for their continuing encouragement

Effect of plyometric jump training on skeletal muscle hypertrophy in healthy individuals: A systematic review with multilevel meta-analysis

Objective: To examine the effect of plyometric jump training on skeletal muscle hypertrophy in healthy individuals.Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in the databases PubMed, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library up to September 2021.Results: Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The main overall finding (44 effect sizes across 15 clusters median = 2, range = 1–15 effects per cluster) indicated that plyometric jump training had small to moderate effects [standardised mean difference (SMD) = 0.47 (95% CIs = 0.23–0.71); p &amp;lt; 0.001] on skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Subgroup analyses for training experience revealed trivial to large effects in non-athletes [SMD = 0.55 (95% CIs = 0.18–0.93); p = 0.007] and trivial to moderate effects in athletes [SMD = 0.33 (95% CIs = 0.16–0.51); p = 0.001]. Regarding muscle groups, results showed moderate effects for the knee extensors [SMD = 0.72 (95% CIs = 0.66–0.78), p &amp;lt; 0.001] and equivocal effects for the plantar flexors [SMD = 0.65 (95% CIs = −0.25–1.55); p = 0.143]. As to the assessment methods of skeletal muscle hypertrophy, findings indicated trivial to small effects for prediction equations [SMD = 0.29 (95% CIs = 0.16–0.42); p &amp;lt; 0.001] and moderate-to-large effects for ultrasound imaging [SMD = 0.74 (95% CIs = 0.59–0.89); p &amp;lt; 0.001]. Meta-regression analysis indicated that the weekly session frequency moderates the effect of plyometric jump training on skeletal muscle hypertrophy, with a higher weekly session frequency inducing larger hypertrophic gains [β = 0.3233 (95% CIs = 0.2041–0.4425); p &amp;lt; 0.001]. We found no clear evidence that age, sex, total training period, single session duration, or the number of jumps per week moderate the effect of plyometric jump training on skeletal muscle hypertrophy [β = −0.0133 to 0.0433 (95% CIs = −0.0387 to 0.1215); p = 0.101–0.751].Conclusion: Plyometric jump training can induce skeletal muscle hypertrophy, regardless of age and sex. There is evidence for relatively larger effects in non-athletes compared with athletes. Further, the weekly session frequency seems to moderate the effect of plyometric jump training on skeletal muscle hypertrophy, whereby more frequent weekly plyometric jump training sessions elicit larger hypertrophic adaptations.</jats:p

A survey of search-based refactoring for software maintenance

This survey reviews published materials relating to the specific area of Search Based Software Engineering concerning software maintenance. 99 papers are selected from online databases to analyze and review the area of Search Based Software Maintenance. The literature addresses different methods to automate the software maintenance process. There are studies that analyze different software metrics, studies that experiment with multi-objective techniques and papers that propose refactoring tools for use. This survey also suggests papers from related areas of research, and introduces some of the concepts and techniques used in the area. The current state of the research is analyzed in order to assess opportunities for future research. This survey is beneficial as an introduction for any researchers aiming to work in the area of Search Based Software Maintenance and will allow them to gain an understanding of the current landscape of the research and the insights gathered. The papers reviewed as well as the refactoring tools introduced are tabulated in order to aid researchers in quickly referencing studies

Analysis of postural balance between two aquatic sports using vertical vs. horizontal body position

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to analyze and compare the postural balance between two aquatic sports where vertical vs. horizontal body positions (i.e., windsurfing vs. swimming) are key techniques for both sports. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Eight volunteer windsurfers and eight swimmers agreed to participate in this study. Each of the assessments was a 2D kinematic analysis of frontal and/or sagittal balance (i.e., in bipedal and/or unipedal stance) of the center of mass velocity on wobble board (Single Plane Balance Board) on hard and/or soft surface. Kinematic analysis was performed in 2D using two action-cams. Data were digitized using the video-based data analysis system SkillSpector. RESULTS: The results showed that the ANOVA, with repeated measures on 1 factor, showed a significant difference (p<0.001) between groups (i.e., swimmers and windsurfers) in all variables and in the interaction between ground (i.e., hard and foam) and group (p<0.01) in all tests in sagittal plane. Furthermore, for the ground*group interaction, a study (i.e., paired t-test) of the difference between balance (i.e., in frontal and/or sagittal plane) on hard and soft ground for each group showed that windsurfers had no difference in body sway in frontal and/or sagittal plane between hard and soft surface in bipedal stance. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that the windsurfers showed better postural balance performances compared to swimmers in the bipedal posture on hard and soft ground. Also, the windsurfers presented a better stability level compared with the swimmers

Effect of Plyometric Jump Training on Skeletal Muscle Hypertrophy in Healthy Individuals: A Systematic Review With Multilevel Meta-Analysis

Objective: To examine the effect of plyometric jump training on skeletal muscle hypertrophy in healthy individuals. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in the databases PubMed, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library up to September 2021. Results: Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The main overall finding (44 effect sizes across 15 clusters median = 2, range = 1–15 effects per cluster) indicated that plyometric jump training had small to moderate effects [standardised mean difference (SMD) = 0.47 (95% CIs = 0.23–0.71); p < 0.001] on skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Subgroup analyses for training experience revealed trivial to large effects in non-athletes [SMD = 0.55 (95% CIs = 0.18–0.93); p = 0.007] and trivial to moderate effects in athletes [SMD = 0.33 (95% CIs = 0.16–0.51); p = 0.001]. Regarding muscle groups, results showed moderate effects for the knee extensors [SMD = 0.72 (95% CIs = 0.66–0.78), p < 0.001] and equivocal effects for the plantar flexors [SMD = 0.65 (95% CIs = −0.25–1.55); p = 0.143]. As to the assessment methods of skeletal muscle hypertrophy, findings indicated trivial to small effects for prediction equations [SMD = 0.29 (95% CIs = 0.16–0.42); p < 0.001] and moderate-to-large effects for ultrasound imaging [SMD = 0.74 (95% CIs = 0.59–0.89); p < 0.001]. Meta-regression analysis indicated that the weekly session frequency moderates the effect of plyometric jump training on skeletal muscle hypertrophy, with a higher weekly session frequency inducing larger hypertrophic gains [β = 0.3233 (95% CIs = 0.2041–0.4425); p < 0.001]. We found no clear evidence that age, sex, total training period, single session duration, or the number of jumps per week moderate the effect of plyometric jump training on skeletal muscle hypertrophy [β = −0.0133 to 0.0433 (95% CIs = −0.0387 to 0.1215); p = 0.101–0.751]. Conclusion: Plyometric jump training can induce skeletal muscle hypertrophy, regardless of age and sex. There is evidence for relatively larger effects in non-athletes compared with athletes. Further, the weekly session frequency seems to moderate the effect of plyometric jump training on skeletal muscle hypertrophy, whereby more frequent weekly plyometric jump training sessions elicit larger hypertrophic adaptations