Article

Authors
Metrics
Comments
Related Content
Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Supporting Information
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
References
Reader Comments (0)
Media Coverage
Figures
Abstract
The current study examined the adaptive response to both endurance (END) and spr
int interval training (SIT) in a group of twenty-one recreationally active adult
s. All participants completed three weeks (four days/ week) of both END (30 minu
tes at ~65% VO2peak work rate (WR) and SIT (eight, 20-second intervals at ~170%
VO2peak WR separated by 10 seconds of active rest) following a randomized crosso
ver study design with a three-month washout period between training intervention
s. While a main effect of training was observed for VO2peak, lactate threshold,
and submaximal heart rate (HR), considerable variability was observed in the ind
ividual responses to both END and SIT. No significant positive relationships wer
e observed between END and SIT for individual changes in any variable. Non-respo
nses were determined using two times the typical error (TE) of measurement for V
O2peak (0.107 L/min), lactate threshold (15.7 W), and submaximal HR (10.7bpm). N
on-responders in VO2peak, lactate threshold, and submaximal HR were observed fol
lowing both END and SIT, however, the individual patterns of response differed f
ollowing END and SIT. Interestingly, all individuals responded in at least one v
ariable when exposed to both END and SIT. These results suggest that the individ
ual response to exercise training is highly variable following different trainin
g protocols and that the incidence of non-response to exercise training may be r
educed by changing the training stimulus for non-responders to three weeks of EN
D or SIT.
Figures
Fig 3Table 2Fig 4Fig 1Table 1Fig 2Fig 3Table 2Fig 4Fig 1Table 1Fig 2
Citation: Bonafiglia JT, Rotundo MP, Whittall JP, Scribbans TD, Graham RB, Gurd
BJ (2016) Inter-Individual Variability in the Adaptive Responses to Endurance an
d Sprint Interval Training: A Randomized Crossover Study. PLoS ONE 11(12): e0167
790. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167790
Editor: Jose A. L. Calbet, Universidad de las Palmas de Gran Canaria, SPAIN
Received: June 6, 2016; Accepted: November 20, 2016; Published: December 9, 2016
Copyright: 2016 Bonafiglia et al. This is an open access article distributed und
er the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestri
cted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original au
thor and source are credited.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper and its supporting inf
ormation files.
Funding: Funding was provided by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Council of
Canada (grant number: 402635; http://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/index_eng.asp) and t

he Canadian Foundation for Innovation (grant number: 25476;https://www.innovatio

n.ca/). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, d
ecision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist
.
Introduction
Considerable heterogeneity exists in the individual response in peak oxygen upta
ke (VO2peak) following exercise training [1 3]. Specifically, VO2peak can increase
[2,4], decrease [5], or remain unchanged [6,7] following structured endurance t
raining (END). Similarly, inter-individual variability in training responses hav
e also been observed following supra-maximal sprint interval training (SIT) [8,9
]. While variability in training responses has been demonstrated following both
END and SIT, it is currently unknown whether individuals who fail to respond fol
lowing one type of exercise training might respond to a different training stimu
lus (i.e. different exercise volume, intensity and metabolic demand).
While END and SIT differ substantially in exercise volume, intensity, and metabo
lic demand, at the group level they induce strikingly similar adaptations in VO2
peak [10,11], lactate threshold [12,13], and muscle oxidative potential [14 16]. I
nterestingly, limited evidence demonstrating that central adaptations following
training may differ between END and SIT [17,18], supports the potential that the
mechanisms underlying similar adaptations in VO2peak may differ following END a
nd SIT. Further, individual variability in both peripheral [19,20] and central [
17] adaptations following training have been observed. Together these results su
ggest that both central and peripheral adaptations may vary in an individual fol
lowing END or SIT, supporting the hypothesis that an individual who fails to res
pond following END may respond following SIT (and vis versa).
Therefore, in order to determine if individuals respond differently to END and S
IT, the present study compared individual responses following three weeks of bot
h END and SIT utilizing a randomized crossover study design with a three-month w
ashout period between training interventions. Individual changes in VO2peak, lac
tate threshold, and submaximal heart rate (HR) were compared and the incidence o
f response and non-response for all variables were classified using typical erro
r (TE), an index of measurement error that considers both biological and technic
al variability [21]. We hypothesized that individual responses to END would not
necessarily reflect responses to SIT (and vis versa), potentially d