Muscle mass and motor unit recruitment
It is often assumed that simply applying a maximal level of effort will allow us to achieve maximal motor unit recruitment, regardless of the exercise that we are performing. Nevertheless, exercises that involve a larger amount of muscle mass generally involve a lower level of motor unit recruitment than those that involve a smaller total amount of muscle mass.
.
#1. Greater voluntary activation deficits with greater muscle size
Across the whole body, there is a general trend that larger muscles are much more difficult to activate fully. They display larger voluntary activation deficits due to fewer high-threshold motor units being recruited.
.
#2. Bilateral deficit of voluntary activation
The bilateral force deficit is a well-known phenomenon. The sum of the forces generated by two limbs in two separate singe-limb exercises is greater than the force produced by two limbs in one combined two-limb exercise. This seems to be partly caused by a greater level of motor unit recruitment in single-limb exercises.
.
#3. Greater peripheral fatigue during exercise with less muscle mass
When we perform exercise that involves smaller total amounts of muscle mass (such as single-joint exercise compared to multi-joint exercise), we can achieve a longer time to task failure and a higher level of peripheral fatigue at task failure. This implies that we can tolerate a higher level of peripheral fatigue (and a higher level of afferent feedback associated with that peripheral fatigue) when the total amount of exercising muscle mass is smaller.
.
The same observation can be made when comparing single-limb and two-limb exercises. Greater peripheral fatigue occurs after the single-limb exercises.
.
And the same observation can be made when comparing upper body and lower body exercises. Greater peripheral fatigue occurs after the upper body exercises.
.
#4. Greater muscle activation with internal focuses of attention
It is well-known that internal focuses of attention allow greater levels of motor unit recruitment in the target muscle compared to no focus of attention and also compared to an external focus of attention. This may well be because the internal focus of attention spares less central motor command for the synergist muscles that are critical for the optimal movement pattern, which is why they generally involve lower levels of coordination. Yet, this may permit greater concentration of the central motor command upon the target muscle during the exercise.
.
Conclusions
It is often assumed that simply applying a maximal level of effort will allow us to achieve maximal motor unit recruitment, regardless of the exercise. However, exercises that involve a larger amount of muscle mass involve a lower level of motor unit recruitment than those that involve a smaller amount of muscle mass. This can be observed in four scenarios. [1] Larger muscles display larger voluntary activation deficits than smaller muscles. [2] The bilateral force deficit appears to be partly caused by a deficit of voluntary activation during two-limb exercises than in single-limb exercises. [3] Exercises that involve less muscle mass (such as single-limb exercises rather than two-limb exercises, single-joint exercises rather than multi-joint exercises, and upper body exercises rather than lower body exercises) experience far more peripheral fatigue at task failure (implying a smaller influence of central nervous system fatigue). [4] Internal focuses of attention involve higher levels of muscle activation in the target muscle, which may be partly due to reduced activation of synergist muscles. Altogether, these four observations indicate that when central motor command is sent to more muscles during exercise, the level of motor unit recruitment in the target muscle is reduced. This likely occurs because the central motor command is limited by the corollary discharge that creates perceived effort in the brain (since we have a maximum tolerable perception of effort). Sending central motor command to more muscles increases the total level of perceived effort for a given level of central motor command to the target muscle.
Comments (6)
Second that question!
Hi Chris. What's your opinion on the effectiveness of unilateral, unstable, leg exercises, with regards to motor unit recruitment for the target muscle? I understand that you are mostly referring to uni lateral machine exercises, but where do you stand on exercises such as pistol squats and rear foot elevated split squats? I remember a few years back when Mike Boyle was saying that he believed RFESS were superior to back squats, as his athletes could RFESS more than half of their back squat, and he believed that the lower back was the limiting factor in back squats. Do you think that the reason could be the bilateral deficit, rather than the lower back limitation, or would the unilateral effect be offset by the balance requirements?
Hello Chris - tremendous as usual - btw love the exercise essentials and the podcasts - however I have a concern - you state my goal is progressive mechanical tension overload on the muscle fibers - requiring a high level of motor unit recruitment first and foremost - so why then does it seem that the logical conclusion of using machines to eliminate competition for the central motor command do not produce greater hypertrophy in the literature then free weight? Or am I wrong? Thanks!
As far as I know, there is only the one study so far comparing hypertrophy between free weights and machines with basically identical exercises and it showed no difference. Let's see what happens after a few more studies are performed.
Solid review, Chris. Thanks. It seems that the lack in results si present due to: Fatigue 1. Too much damage 2. Insufficient rest Lack of stimulus 3. Working too far from failure 4. Poor muscle activation due to instability or/and too much muscle mass involved in the movement
Yes, in addition, we could add afferent feedback because of cardiovascular sensations and metabolite burning sensations due to taking too short rest periods
