27 research outputs found

    A COMPARISON OF BASEBALL POSITIONAL DIFFERENCES WITH REACTIVE STRENGTH INDEX-MODIFIED

    Get PDF
    The purpose of this study was to examine positional differences amongst 29 baseball players using the Reactive Strength Index-modified (RSImod) values during unloaded and loaded countermovement jumps (CMJ). A secondary purpose was to determine the relationship between other jump performance characteristics and RSImod values. All athletes underwent CMJ testing and RSImod values were compared between pitchers and position players. The loaded condition CMJ produced statistically different RSImod values between the two groups. Scaled peak force was somewhat more strongly related to RSImod than rate of force development (RFD). The current study indicates that position players may possess higher reactive strength capabilities than pitchers and scaled peak force may be more important than RFD in determining reactive strength characteristics

    REACTIVE STRENGTH INDEX-MODIFIED: A COMPARISON BETWEEN SIX U.S. COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC TEAMS

    Get PDF
    The purpose of this study was to compare reactive strength index-modified (RSImod) between six U.S. collegiate sport teams. One hundred six athletes performed maximum effort countermovement jumps during unloaded and loaded conditions. RSImod measures for each team were compared using one-way ANOVAs, and Bonferroni post hoc tests where warranted. Statistically significant differences in RSImod values existed between teams during both unloaded (< 1kg) and loaded (20kg) conditions. The greatest RSImod values during both conditions were produced by men’s soccer and followed in order by baseball, women’s volleyball, men’s tennis, women’s soccer, and women’s tennis. The data indicate that athletes from different sports possess different reactive strength characteristics

    THE USE OF REACTIVE STRENGTH INDEX-MODIFIED AS AN EXPLOSIVE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN MALE AND FEMALE ATHLETES

    Get PDF
    This study examined the reliability of reactive strength index-modified (RSImod), relationships between RSImod and force-time variables, and difference in RSImod between male and female collegiate athletes. 106 Division I collegiate athletes performed unloaded and loaded countermovement jumps. Intraclass correlation coefficients and coefficients of variation were used to establish the reliability of RSImod. Correlations were calculated between RSImod and rate of force development, peak force, and peak power. RSImod appears to be a reliable performance measurement in male and female athletes. Furthermore, RSImod has moderate to very large relationships with rate of force development, peak force, and peak power. Statistically significant differences in RSImod existed between males and females during both unloaded and loaded CMJs

    THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE REACTIVE STRENGTH INDEX-MODIFIED AND MEASURES OF FORCE DEVELOPMENT IN THE ISOMETRIC MID-THIGH PULL

    Get PDF
    Reactive strength index-modified (RSImod) may be an important variable to measure in the performance testing and monitoring of athletes, and very little work has examined this particular variable. One hundred six Division-I collegiate athletes performed countermovement jumps and the isometric mid-thigh pull. The relationship between the RSImod and variables from the isometric mid-thigh pull representative of explosive performance were evaluated with Pearson’s r. Relationships between RSImod and variables related to explosiveness ranged from moderate to large. Maximum and relative maximum strength had the strongest correlations to RSImod. RSImod appears to be a measure of explosiveness. Furthermore, an athlete’s isometric strength may be an indicator of their reactive strength

    Orthostatic hypotension in young adults with and without posttraumatic stress disorder.

    Get PDF
    The purpose of this research is (1) to evaluate differences in orthostatic hypotension (OH) among young adults with and without posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and (2) to examine whether group differences may be attributable to behavioral risk factors frequently associated with PTSD

    Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

    Get PDF
    In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure fl ux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defi ned as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (inmost higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium ) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the fi eld understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation it is imperative to delete or knock down more than one autophagy-related gene. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways so not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field

    Dissecting the Shared Genetic Architecture of Suicide Attempt, Psychiatric Disorders, and Known Risk Factors

    Get PDF