1 IJSM/4235/16.1.2015/MPS Training & Testing Jurado-Lavanant A et al. The Efects of Aquatic … Int J Sports Med 2015; 36: 1–8 ■ Proof copy for correction only. All forms of publication, duplication or distribution prohibited under copyright law. ■ IJSM/4235/16.1.2015/MPS The Efects of Aquatic Plyometric Training on Repeated Jumps, Drop Jumps and Muscle Damage Authors A. Jurado-Lavanant 1 , J. R. Alvero-Cruz 2 , F. Pareja-Blanco 3 , C. Melero-Romero 4 , D. Rodríguez-Rosell 3 , J. C. Fernandez-Garcia 5 Ailiations Ailiation addresses are listed at the end of the article Introduction ▼ Plyometric training is a very popular form of physical conditioning that has been extensively studied over the last 3 decades. It is currently used in all types of sports and by diferent levels of athletes to increase muscular strength and explosiveness [33, 35, 40]. Plyometrics present a stretch-shortening cycle (SSC), which is divided into phases, beginning with an intense eccentric contraction of the muscle and amortization phase, followed immediately by a rapid concen- tric contraction [28, 30]. After stretching, the muscle stores elastic energy, which is used to produce more force during the concentric con- traction than it can be provided by simply performing a concentric action [25, 28]. The ei- ciency of the SSC is dependent on the immediate transfer from the preactivated and eccentrically stretched muscle-tendon complex to the concen- tric push-of phase [38]. Thus, training should improve the adaptation of muscles from an eccentric to a concentric contraction, enabling them to increase the speed and force with which they perform. In this regard, several studies have shown that plyometric training is efective in eliciting signiicant positive changes in dynamic athletic performance, particularly in vertical jump ability (squat jump, countermovement jump, drop jump and repeated jump) [22, 29, 31]. The efects of plyometric training can vary because of a large number of variables, such as number of jumps, number of sets, recovery time between jumps and between sets, type of jump (squat jump, countermovement jump, drop jump, repeated jumps), program duration or the surface over which plyometric training is per- formed. In this regard, the majority of plyometric training sessions take place on land. However, land-based plyometric programs have also been correlated to musculoskeletal injuries and delayed onset muscle soreness because of the high-intensity and compression forces on the joints and muscles [20, 25, 30]. On the other hand, the principle of overload is universally known, which consists in producing a greater stress than those evoked by a previous stimulus during a training program [19]. Unfortunately, the optimal volume stimulus for the develop- ment of physical performance has not yet been accepted after revision December 02, 2014 Bibliography DOI http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1055/s-0034-1398574 Int J Sports Med 2015; 36: 1–8 © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York ISSN 0172-4622 Correspondence Dr. Alexis Jurado-Lavanant University of Malaga Laboratory of Human Movement Campus De Teatinos. Calle Albert Einstein, 4 Málaga Spain CP: 29010 Tel.: + 34/630/224 233 Fax: + 34/952/131 303 alexisjuradolavanant@gmail. com Key words ● ▶ vertical jump ● ▶ stretch-shortening cycle exercise ● ▶ muscle strength ● ▶ muscle soreness ● ▶ creatine kinase ● ▶ reactive jumps Abstract ▼ The purpose of this study was to compare the efects of land- vs. aquatic based plyometric training on programs on the drop jump, repeated jump performance and muscle damage. 65 male students were randomly assigned to one of 3 groups: aquatic plyometric training group (APT), plyometric training group (PT) and control group (CG). Both experimental groups trained twice a week for 10 weeks performing the same number of sets and total jumps. Prior to, halfway through and after the training programs, the following variables were measured: creatine kinase (CK) concentration, maximal height during a drop jump from the height of 30 (DJ30) and 50 cm (DJ50), and mean height during a repeated verti- cal jump test (RJ). The training resulted in a sig- niicant increase (P < 0.01–0.001) in RJ, DJ30, and DJ50 for PT, whereas neither APT nor CG reached any signiicant improvements. APT showed likely/possibly improvements on DJ30 and DJ50, respectively. Greater intra-group ES in CK was found for PT when compared to APT. In conclu- sion, although APT appears to be a safe alterna- tive method for reducing the stress produced on the musculoskeletal system by plyometric train- ing, PT seems to produce greater gains on reac- tive jumps performance than APT.