ASSESSMENT

OF THE EFFECTS OF VARIOUS TRANING MODALITIES ON BODY

COMPOSITION







By
Julianne Borba










A Senior Project submitted
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Bachelor of Science in Nutrition




Food Science and Nutrition Department
California Polytechnic State University
San Luis Obispo, CA

December 2014

ABSTRACT
Recent exercise guidelines to affect changes in body composition and weight
management have included resistance training as part of the exercise prescription, though
few studies have actually compared the effects of aerobic training to both resistance and
combined training modalities. The aim of this review is to systematically compare the
health benefits of aerobic training (AT) alone to those of resistance (RT) and combination
training (CT) methods. The primary outcomes assessed were total body mass, fat mass,
fat-free mass or lean body mass, and resting metabolic rate. Though the studies reviewed
had differing populations, durations and types of training, and assessment methods, the
results were generally conclusive. These randomized controlled trials demonstrated that
AT and CT methods reduced total body mass and total body fat more than RT. They also
concluded that RT and CT were successful in increasing fat-free mass or lean body mass,
while AT was not. An increase in fat-free mass or lean body mass has been associated
with beneficial effects on resting metabolic rate and energy expenditure. Therefore it was
shown that a program of combined AT and RT can provide greater benefits for
improvement

in

body

composition

and

for

weight

management.

Introduction
Resting Metabolic Rate (RMR) is defined by The Dictionary of Sport and
Exercise Science and Medicine as the minimum energy expenditure required to support
basic physiological functions and processes. RMR accounts for ~60-75% of total daily
energy expenditure, so even small increases in RMR can have long-term benefits for
weight management (Poehlman, 1989). There are several determinants of RMR, most of
which are invariable. Age, gender, genetics, body composition, fat-free mass, and lean
body mass all play an important role in defining a persons resting metabolic rate
(Johnston et. al., 2005). Because RMR is so highly correlated with body composition,
particularly fat-free mass (FFM) and lean body mass (LBM), increases in FFM and LBM
may beneficially alter a persons RMR (Nelson et. al., 1992).
In theory, increasing FFM and LBM should increase RMR, resulting in body
composition changes and increased daily energy expenditure (Kravitz & Malone, 1999).
SPAside from diet, the thermic effect of activity is the largest component in terms of
weight management and obesity prevention (Mifflin et al., 1990). Due to the rapidly
increasing numbers of overweight and obese women, preventative health measures are
becoming more and more important (Ferraro et al. 1992; Westerterp et al. 1992).
Determining the best physical activity prescription for increasing LBM, FFM, and RMR
may serve as a valuable tool in combating weight gain (Bryne & Wilmore, 2001). The
thermic effect of physical activity is the most influential factor in altering a persons body
composition and RMR (Broeder, Burrhus, Svanevik & Wilmore, 1992). Previous studies
have suggested that aerobic exercise can increase a persons RMR, but little evidence
exists on the effect of aerobic exercise with resistance training (Byrne & Wilmore, 2001).

In 2000, Poehlman et al. reviewed several studies that examined the effect of resistance
training on LBM and RMR, concluding a beneficial effect. Given the evidence that
supports the role of resistance training in increasing skeletal muscle mass and FFM, it
seems likely that an exercise regimen that combines aerobic and resistance training may
lead to beneficial effects in RMR.
This paper will discuss the effects of various exercise prescriptions on the LBM,
FFM, and RMR of sedentary, overweight/obese subjects. The research provided will
compare the effects of aerobic exercise alone vs. the combination of aerobic and
resistance training in order to determine the most effective physical activity regimen for
increasing RMR and promoting weight management.
Resting Metabolic Rate and Body Composition Overview
Resting Metabolic Rate
Definition: Resting metabolic rate (RMR), as defined by the Medical Dictionary,
is the minimum number of calories needed to support basic functions, such as breathing
and circulation; its the rate of energy expenditure required for cellular function, for
temperature regulation, and to maintain the systems of the body.
Significance: RMR is the rate at which metabolic processanabolic processes
which build up tissues as well as catabolic processes which breakdown tissuesrequire
energy or fuel to occur (Kelly, 2012). RMR generally accounts for ~60-80% of total
calories expended per day (Shook, 2013).
Fat-Free Mass
Definition: Fat-free mass (FFM) is comprised of the non-fat components of the
human body including items such as skin, bones, skeletal muscle, ligaments and tendons,

organs and water content (Kravitz & Heyward, 1992). As displayed in Figure 1 below,
FFM contains virtually all of the bodys water and metabolically active tissues; it is
divided into body cell mass and extracellular mass and is the source of all caloric energy
expenditure (Sklovsky, 2003).

Figure 1. Demonstrates a graphical representation of the elements that comprise FFM as

well as the relationship between mass and water distribution. Found 10/26/14 at
http://www.biodyncorp.com/product/450/body_model_450.html
Significance: Body cell mass (BCM)-- including muscle cells, organ cells, and
immune cells-- contain the metabolically active components of the body (Kaslow, 2014).
BCM is the living, protein-based, metabolically active tissue where over 90% of bodily
processes occur; nearly 60% of BCM is muscle tissue, 20% is organs, and the other 20%
is comprised of circulatory cells and tissues. BCM can be increased through the process
of converting food into tissue (anabolism) or decreased through the process of breaking

down tissue (catabolism) (LHeureux, 2006). Extracellular Mass is found on the outside
of cells and is responsible for providing body structure, support, and transport; it includes
bones, tendons, collagen, plasma, and extracellular fluid (LHeureux, 2006).
Lean Body Mass
Definition: Lean Body Mass (LBM), like FFM, includes the weight of your
muscles, bones, tendons, ligaments, and internal organs; LBM differs from FFM in that it
includes the small percentage of essential fat (Kraemer & Fleck, 2007). Essential fat
includes the very small amount of fat stored in a persons organs (heart, lungs, kidneys,
liver, spleen, and intestines), in bone marrow, in muscle tissue, and throughout the tissues
of the central nervous system.
Significance: The body requires this fat to maintain vital bodily functions like
temperature regulation and energy production. Women tend to have a higher amount of
essential fat than men due to childbearing and hormone related functions (Bowerman,
2014).
Main Determinants of RMR
Age
As a person ages, fat generally increases as lean body mass and tissue energy metabolism
decrease, which tends to result in a lower RMR (Fukagawa, Bandini &Young, 1990).
Generally, the amount of physical activity a person does decreases with age, leading to
progressive muscle loss, and as a result RMR declines ~2-3% per decade after the age of
20 (Kinucan & Kravitz, 2006). As displayed in the figure below, energy utilization and
production steadily declines with age, decreasing metabolic rate.

Figure 2. Graphical depiction of how a persons basal metabolic rate gradually decreases
with age. Found 10/27/14 at FitnessHealth101.com
Gender
Men and women require a certain amount of fat to support their organs and
provide adequate energy for daily functions; a man requires a minimum of 3% body fat to
function properly but women have higher requirements, needing a minimum of 12%
body fat, due to their sex-specific reproductive organs (Arciero, Goran & Young, 1990).
Due to these differences in fat mass, women having a higher fat mass and lower FFM
tend to have lower RMRs compared to men (Arciero, Goran &Young, 1990). As
demonstrated in the figure below, RMR tends to be around 5-10% lower for women due
to higher percentages of body fat and less muscle mass compared to men of the same size
(Manore, Meyer & Thompson, 2009).

Body Size
Height and weight are important in determining the amount of energy a person
expends and requires; additional body tissue requires additional basal metabolic activity,
therefore a larger person would theoretically have a higher metabolic rate (Bogardus et
al., 1986). Essentially, the larger the body, the more calories needed to sustain it which is
reflective in most RMR equations; metabolic rate increases to accommodate larger organ
systems, greater muscle mass, and to maintain thermal equilibrium. (Manore, Meyer &
Thompson, 2009).
Fat-Free Mass
Fat-free mass is defined by the Medical Dictionary as the combined mass or
weight of the body (water, bone, and muscle) that is not fat. FFM is considered to be the
best single predictor of energy expenditure, accounting for ~53-88% of the variation in
RMR (Nelson, Weinsler, Long & Schutz, 1992). FFM is the source of nearly all
metabolic caloric expenditure; so an individual that has greater FFM or LBM tends to
have a greater metabolic rate per kg body weight due to greater metabolic activity of
muscle compared to fat. (Bogardus et al., 1986). Figure 3 below compares two women of
the same age and height, one average weight and the other obese, demonstrating that the
obese women has a lower REE per kg due which is likely attributed to her lower
percentage of FFM.
Factors that Affect FFM/LBM
Diet
Though caloric restriction is one of the most efficient ways to initiate weight loss,
it is frequently associated with the undesirable loss of FFM or LBM (Mclver, Wycherley

Figure 3. Compares two women of the same age and height, demonstrating that the
obese women has a lower REE per kg body weight but the two women have similar
REEs due to the average sized womans higher proportion of FFM. Found 10/16/14 at
medscape.com
& Clifton, 2012). This loss is due to increased protein catabolism, which takes place as a
result of the negative net skeletal muscle protein balance associated with weight loss
(Mclver et al, 2012). Since FFM is the main determinant of RMR, a decrease may hinder
weight loss progress and promote weight regain (Nelson et al., 1992). Many researchers
have been studying the affects of calorie restricted diets high in protein to promote weight
loss while preserving FFM or LBM and have found positive effects, though the
mechanism behind these results require more evidence (Kreiger, Sitren, Daniels &
Langkamp-Henken, 2006).

Exercise
Although weight loss as a result of physical activity is mainly due to excess
energy expended during exercise, further mechanisms may work to increase RMR and
promote additional energy expenditure post-exercise (Johnstone et al, 2005). The thermic
effect of physical activity is the most variable contributor to energy expenditure due to its
effects on FFM or LBM, the greatest predictor of RMR and energy expenditure (Nelson,
Weinsler, Long & Schutz, 1992). In theory, increases in FFM or LBM should increase
RMR and lead to beneficial changes in energy expenditure and body composition, though
the ideal exercise prescription to induce these changes is still up for debate (Kavitz,
Malone, 1999).
Endurance Exercise (EE): Aerobic or endurance exercise is any physical activity
that involves the use of several large groups of muscles and requires additional effort by
the heart and lungs to meet the increased demand for oxygen; it includes walking,
jogging, running, cycling, swimming, ect (Medical Dictionary). The Center for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends that adults perform at least 2.5 hours (150
min) of moderate intensity aerobic activity, 1 hour and 115 min (75min) of vigorous
intensity aerobic activity, or an equivalent combination of the two per week.
Resistance Exercise (RE): Anaerobic or resistance exercise is any activity
designed to increase muscle strength and joint motility; its any short-duration exercise
powered mainly by metabolic pathways that do not use oxygen (Medical Dictionary).
Sprinting, jumping, weight lifting, push-ups, sit-ups, and yoga are all examples of
anaerobic or resistance exercises (CDC). The CDC recommend that adults perform
strength-building activities at least twice a week that work major muscles groupslegs,

hips, back, abdomen, chest, shoulders, and arms.

Effects of Endurance Exercise Regimens vs. the Combination of Endurance and
Resistance Exercise Regimens on FFM/LBM and RMR
Endurance exercise is generally used to alter body composition due to its ability
to increase energy expenditure and fat utilization (Wilmore, 1996). Endurance/aerobic
exercise has been shown to have more of an effect on fat mass and total body mass than it
does on FFM (Ryan, 2010). Resistance exercise, on the other hand, has been associated
with increasing a persons FFM or LBM, which plays a vital role in determining a
persons RMR (Wilis et al, 2012). Due to its potentially beneficial effect on RMR, which
is the main component of energy expenditure, implementing resistance exercise may aid
in weight management and obesity prevention (Sanal, Ardic & Kirac, 2013). Several of
the following studies examine the effects of aerobic exercise vs. the combination of
aerobic and resistance exercises on body composition and/or RMR in order to determine
the most effective physical activity prescription.
In a 1998 study conducted by Dolezal and Potteiger, the effects of both aerobic
training alone, resistance training alone, and a concurrent aerobic and resistance training
regimen on body composition and metabolic rate were examined The study included 30
subjects who were non-dieting young men, ages 19-21. They were each randomly
assigned to one of three experimental groups (endurance training, resistance training, or
concurrent endurance and resistance training) and were prescribed a 10-week training
regimen.
The endurance trained group (ET) participated in jogging and/or running for 3
days a week, gradually increasing their duration and intensity. The ET group started at 25

minutes at 65% maximum heart rate for weeks 1-2 and ended at 40 minutes at 75-85%
maximum heart rate for weeks 7-10. The resistance training group (RT) used both
Olympic free weights and Universal machines, performing upper-body exercises once a
week, lower-body exercises once a week, and a combination of the two once a week.
Subjects performed 10-15 repetitions per set, with the resistance established so that
subjects experienced fatigue at the 10-15 repetition point. Subjects in the combined
endurance and resistance group (CT) participated in the same endurance and resistance
regimens described above, completing resistance training prior to endurance training for
each of the 3 days a week.
Researchers used indirect calorimetry to measure the basal metabolic rate (BMR)
of subjects. To analyze body composition, researchers used hydrostatic weighing to
determine body density and total mass, subjects were measured for their underwater
weight a total of five times, and their average value was taken for means of analysis. The
changes produced were assessed using a one-way ANOVA analysis.
Results of the study demonstrated that endurance exercise had a positive effect on
body weight, body mass, and fat mass. All three groups demonstrated a significant
decrease in body fat after the 10-week training period, though the decrease in BF and FM
among the subjects in the CT was significantly greater than those in the ET and RT
groups. Though both the ET and CT groups showed significant decreases in fat mass,
only the RT and CT groups showed a significant increase of FFM. Absolute BMR
increased among both the RT and the CT groups after the 10-week training period, but
actually decreased among the subjects in the ET group as shown in Figure 4 below.

Figure 4. Change in BMR (kJ/day) for resistance, endurance, and concurrent exercise
training groups.
This study indicated the effectiveness of endurance training for decreasing
weight, decreasing body fat, and decreasing fat mass. It also demonstrated that resistance
training had beneficial effects as far as increasing both fat-free mass and resting
metabolic rate. The combination of both endurance and resistance training proved to be
the most beneficial, sharing all the benefits of both endurance and resistance training
modalities. Dolezal and Potteiger concluded that concurrent ET and RT proved to be the
most effective exercise regimen for weight management.
A similar study was conducted by Willis, Slentz, Bateman, Shields, Piner, Bates,
Houmard, and Kraes in 2012. Willis et al. sought to determine the best mode of exercise
for obesity reduction by analyzing the effects of three different regimens on body
composition. Researchers looked at the primary outcomes of aerobic training alone,

resistance training alone, or concurrent aerobic and resistance training on body mass, fat
mass, and lean body mass. Subjects participating in the study were sedentary (exercising
<2 times/wk), they were overweight or moderately obese (BMI b/w 25-35 kg/m^2), and
ranged from 18-70 years old. Of the 155 subjects that were randomly assigned to one of
the three exercise groups and completed the 8-month training program, 119 of them had
consistent measurement data and were included in the analysis.
The aerobically trained group in this study was prescribed the caloric equivalent
of ~12miles/week at 65-80% VO2 max, which they performed using treadmills, elliptical
trainers, cycle ergometers, or a combination. The resistance trained group gradually built
up their number of sets starting with one set during weeks 1-2, two sets during weeks 3-4,
and attaining the prescribed three sets by week 5. The resistance group trained 3
days/wk, doing 3 sets of 8-12 repetitions designed to target all major muscle groups
gradually increasing weight as appropriate. The combined resistance plus aerobic
training group did both of the previously described regimens.
Sessions were confirmed with visual observation by the fitness staff and caloric
intake was assessed using a 3-day food record and a 24-hr recall interview at both the
beginning and the end of the training period. Body composition was either assessed by
BOD POD air displacement plethysmography method or DEXA (dual energy X-ray
absorptiometry machine), depending on the participants location placement.
Researchers reported that subjects in the aerobic exercise group demonstrated a
decrease of body mass, a decrease of fat mass, and a decrease in waist circumference
after participating in the experiment. As shown in the figure below, Willis et al. found
that similar body weight and fat mass losses were seen in the aerobic and combined

training groups regardless of the fact that the exercise duration in the combined group
was about two times as long as that of the aerobic training group. Though for means of
increasing lean body mass, resistance exercise is the optimal mode of exercise. They
proposed that, taking time-efficiency into account, aerobic exercise is the optimal mode
of exercise for the purpose of improving fat-mass and total body mass in previously
sedentary, overweight/obese subjects.

Figure 5. Shows the effect of different training modalities on body mass and body
composition changes; AT= Aerobic Training group, RT= Resistance Training group,
AT/RT= Combined Aerobic and Resistance Training group; AT and AT/RT showed
significant increases in body wt. and fat mass; RT and AT/RT showed significant
increases in LBM; AT/RT decreased % body fat more than AT or RT.
Ho, Dhaliwal, Hills, and Pal conducted a study in 2012 in which they examined
the effects of aerobic training, resistance training, and a combination of aerobic and
resistance training on cardiovascular risk factors, weight, and fat loss. The subjects in
this study were 97 overweight or obese men (n=16) and women (n=81) with BMIs

greater than 25kg/m^2. Subjects were between 40-66 years old and were sedentary or
relatively inactive prior to the study.
The study consisted of a 12-week training period in which subjects were
randomly assigned to one of four training groups control group, aerobic group,
resistance group, or combination group. The control group was not given any exercise
intervention. The aerobic training group performed 30 minutes of aerobic exercise in the
form of treadmill walking at 60% heart rate reserve for a total of 5 days/week. The
resistance training group performed 30 minutes of resistance exercise using weight
resistance machines for a total of 5 days/week, completing four sets of 8-12 repetitions
for leg press, leg curl, leg extension, bench press, and rear deltoid row. The combination
training group performed 15 minutes of the same aerobic exercise as the aerobic training
group and 15 minutes of the same resistance exercise as the resistance training group,
completing two sets on the weight resistance machines rather than four.
Subjects were required to keep food diaries to monitor dietary intake and were
advised to keep food intake and physical activity the same as before the study aside from
their prescribed training modalities. Weight was measured using electronic scales,
abdominal and total body fat were measured using dual-energy x-ray absorptiomety
(DEXA) at baseline and after the 12 week training period. Resting metabolic expenditure
was measured in the fasting state at baseline and at 12 weeks by indirect open-circuit
calorimetry. Data was analyzed using General Linear Model to assess the effects of the
groups after adjusting for baseline values, paired t-tests were used to analyze difference
within each group, and hoc comparisons were used in analyzing the effects between
groups.

Ho, Dhaliwal, Hills, and Pal found significant decreases in body weight, BMI,
and total body fat in the combination training group compared to the control and
resistance training groups. The combination group demonstrated lower body weight and
lower BMIs after the 12-week training period compared to the control and resistance
groups. They determined that the lack of significant decreases in weight and BMI in the
aerobic group and resistance group may be a result of the 30-minute moderate-intensity
exercise prescription being insufficient stimuli. Given these results, Ho, Dhaliwal, Hills,
and Pal concluded that combination exercise has a greater benefit for weight loss, fat loss,
and cardio-respiratory fitness than aerobic and resistance training regimens. They
suggested that a combination of both aerobic and resistance exercises should be
recommended for overweight and obese adults.
Sanal, Ardic, and Kirac performed a study in 2013 in which they analyzed and
compared the effects of aerobic or combined aerobic and resistance exercise on body
composition. The participants in this study included 65 overweight or obese men (n=31)
and women (n=34) with BMIs greater than 25kg/m^2. Subjects ranged in age from 3849 years old and were either sedentary or untrained.
The study consisted of a 12-week training period in which subjects were
randomly assigned to either the aerobic training group or the aerobic resistance training
group. The aerobic training group was instructed to exercise on the leg cycle ergometer
for 15 minutes, with the intensity of the exercise targeting a heart rate between 50-85% of
the maximum heart rate. Subjects exercised in their target heart rate ranges for 12-15
minutes 3 days/week for the first month, 20-30 minutes for four days/week the second
month, and 30-45 minutes for five days/week the third month.

The combined aerobic and resistance group performed the same aerobic exercise
described above with the addition of resistance exercise two days/week. They used six
different exercise stations targeting all major muscle groups of the upper and lower body
including leg extension (quadriceps), hip abduction (gluteus medius), abdominal flexion
(rectus abdominalis), chest press (pectoralis major), arm flexion (biceps), and armextension (triceps). Subjects did these resistance exercises for 3-6 sets with 10 repetitions
in 50% 1RM (1 repetition maximum) for the first 6 weeks and 2-3 sets with 10 repetitions
in 75-80% of 1RM for the second 6 weeks. All subjects were advised not to change their
eating habits. Weight was measured with an electronic scale and whole and regional
body composition was assessed using the DEXA method in order to determine the fat
mass, fat-free mass, and percent fat of the subjects before and after the 12-week training
period.
Sanal, Ardic, and Kiracs study demonstrated that both aerobic training and the
combination of aerobic and resistance training were effective in decreasing body weight
and fat mass among subjects after the 12 week training period. Researchers found that
only the combination of aerobic and resistance exercise were significantly effective in
increasing fat-free mass in all regional and whole body composition measurements while
only the aerobic training group were significantly effective in reducing fat-mass. Overall
they concluded that, with no calorie restriction and no significant weight loss in either
group, the increase in fat-free mass seen in the aerobic resistance training group was
more favorable than the results seen in the aerobic training group.
Sillanpaa, Hakkinen, Nyman, Mattila, Cheng, Karavirta, Laaksonen, Huuhka,
Kraemer, and Hakkinen conducted a study in 2008. They analyzed the effects of strength

training, endurance training, or the combination of strength and endurance training on

body composition and fitness. There were 53 subjects participating in the study,
consisting of men with an average of 55 years old but ranging from 40-65 years old.
Subjects were healthy, untrained men with BMI s less than 28kg/m^2.
The study was designed with a 21-week training program in which subjects were
randomized to one of four groupscontrol, endurance training, strength training, or a
combination of endurance and strength training. Each training program was separated
into three different 7-week cycles, increasing exercise intensity as the program
progressed. The control group was not given any exercise prescription. The endurance
training group trained twice a week using a bicycle ergometer. In the first 7 week cycle
subjects trained for 30 minutes, in the second 7 week cycle they trained for 45 minutes,
and in the last 7 week cycle they trained for 60 minutes, increasing intensity in each.
The strength training group was prescribed several different exercises targeting all
the major muscle groups. Subjects completed 2 exercises for the leg extensor muscles
(leg press & knee extensor), 1 exercise for bilateral and unilateral knee flexion, and 4-5
exercises targeting other muscle groups (bench press, triceps, pushdown, or lateral
pulldowns); they did sit-up exercises for the trunk flexors or other trunk extensor
exercises, bilateral/unilateral elbow flexions, or leg abduction/adduction exercises.
Individual loads of strength training were determined on the basis of initial strength tests.
During cycle 1 the strength training subjects completed their exercises at 40-60% 1RM,
during cycle 2 they completed their exercises at 60-80% 1RM, and during cycle 3 they
completed their exercises at 70-90% of 1RM. The combined endurance and strength
training group performed the endurance training regimen described above twice a week

and the strength training regimen described above twice a week as well. Researchers
used Bioimpedence analysis (BIA) to assess subjects percent body fat and used DEXA
to assess whole and regional body composition and to determine the fat mass and fat-free
mass of subjects before and after the 21-week training program.
As demonstrated in Figure 6 below, Sillanpaa et al. found that the endurance
trained, strength trained, and combination of endurance and strength trained groups all
showed significant decreases in body fat percentage. They found that only the strength
trained group showed significant increases in lean body mass. Though the combined
training group participated in a greater amount of exercise, it was found to be of the
greatest benefit. Overall, they determined that the combined training regimen resulted in
similar benefit to each of strength and endurance training modalities separately.
Therefore they suggest that the combination of strength and endurance training is the
optimal mode of exercise for improving physical fitness in untrained men.
Sang-Kab Park, Joe-Hyun Park, Yoo-Chan Kwon, Ho-Sung Kim, Mi-Suk
Yoon, and Hyun-Tae Park conducted a study in 2003 addressing the effect of combined
aerobic and resistance training vs aerobic training alone on body composition. The
subjects in this study consisted of 30 middle aged women ranging from 40-45 years old.
The women included in this study were previously sedentary and classified as obese,
having BMIs greater than 25kg/m^2.
The study was comprised of a 24-week training program in which subjects were
assigned to one of three groupsthe control group, the aerobic training group, or the
combined aerobic and resistance training group. The control group was not prescribed

Figure 6. Changes in body composition during the 21 week training program; E=

Endurance Training group (n=14), S= Strength Training group (n=13), SE= combined
Endurance and Strength Training group (n=15), C= Control group (n=10); ***p < 0.001,
**p < 0.01, *p < 0.05 showing significant differences between groups from week 0 to
week 21; ###p < 0.001, ##p < 0.01, #p <0.05 show significant differences within groups
from week 0 to week 21.
any exercise regimen. Both the aerobic exercise group and the combination exercise
group started each training session with a 10 minute warm up and ended each session
with a 10 minute cool down. The aerobic training group participated in 60 minutes of
aerobic exercise per day for 6 days a week. For the first 12 weeks, the subjects exercised
at 60-70% of the maximum heart rate and their training consisted of the following: side
by side, step touch, lunge side, v-step, grapevine, pivot turn, cha cha cha, mambo rock,
diamond step, single hamstring walking, heel touch, sit-up, push up. For the second 12

weeks of the program, the subjects exercised at 60-70% of their maximum heart rate and
their training consisted of the following: fast walking, turn round, heel side, knee-up,
scissors double, hop and jump, jumping jack, side kick, full turn, double kick.
The combined aerobic and resistance training group participated in 60 minutes of
exercise a day, following the aerobic exercise regimen described above 3 days per week
(Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays) and a resistance exercise regimen for 3 days per
week (Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays). The resistance training group completed a
combination of exercises target the major muscle groups of the body including bench
press, side raise, triceps push away, barbell curl, leg curl, leg extension, leg press, leg
raise, abdominal crunch, and lat pull down. During the first 12 weeks of the resistance
program, subjects exercised at 60% of 1RM and for the second 12 weeks of the program
they exercised at 70% 1RM.
Park et al. used STDK-AD autobody weight to assess the height and weight of
subjects before and after the 24-week training period. They used Inbody 3.0 to measure
the percent body fat and to assess the lean body mass before and after the training
program took place. Paired t-tests were used to evaluate the differences between baseline
values and post 24 week training values. Park et al. used a one-way ANOVA to evaluate
the changes among groups and all analyses were done through SPSS statistical software.
After the 24 week training period, researchers found that both the aerobic training
group and the combination training group were effective in decreasing subjects body
weight and decreasing subjects percentage of body fat. They also found that only the
combination group, participating in both aerobic and resistance training, was effective in
increasing the lean body mass of participants whereas the aerobic training group

demonstrated no change. Therefore, they concluded that concurrent aerobic and

resistance training proved to be the most effective in providing beneficial body
composition changes among middle-aged obese women.
Summary and Future Research
The main goal of this review of literature was to determine whether aerobic training alone
or a combination of aerobic and resistance training has a more beneficial impact on body
composition and resting metabolic rate. The major characteristics and results of these
studies are demonstrated in the table below. These studies indicate that aerobic training is
the most effective mode of exercise for decreasing body weight/mass and decreasing fat
mass. They also concluded that the addition of a resistance training regimen was
necessary in promoting increases of fat free mass or lean body mass. They found that a
combination of both aerobic and resistance training had the ability to decrease body
weight/mass and fat mass while simultaneously increasing lean body mass. Due to the
fact that fat free mass or lean body mass is the most variable predictor of a persons
resting metabolic rate, the combination of aerobic and resistance training may prove to be
the most effective exercise modality in improving body composition and promoting
increases in resting metabolic rate. Therefore, prescribing a combination of both aerobic
and resistance training may be most beneficial in preventing obesity and promoting
weight management.
Though the majority of the studies assessed had similar results, the
varying characteristics and assessment tools among them make it hard to draw
conclusions about what specific mode of exercise, duration, and intensity should be
recommended. The subjects are one of the most distinguishable differences among these

Table 1: A compilation of peer reviewed studies, including treatments and the affects of
different training modalities on body composition and RMR.
Author
Study
Subjects
Duratio Training
Assessment Results
Design
n
Groups
Tools

Dolezal,
Potteiger

Randomized Men (19control

21yrs)

10
weeks

Aerobic
Indirect
Resistance Calorimetry,
Combined Hydrostatic
Weighing

Optimal
benefits
with
Combined
training

Sanal,
Ardic,
Kirac

Randomized Sedentary,
control
overweight
/obese men
& women
(20-40yrs)

12
weeks

Aerobic
Combined

Optimal
benefits
with
Combined
training

Ho,
Randomized Sedentary,
Dhaliwal, control
overweight
Hills, Pal
/obese men
& women
(40-66yrs)

12
weeks

Control
DEXA,
Aerobic
Indirect
Resistance Calorimetry
Combined

Optimal
benefits
with
Combined
training

Willis et
al.

Randomized Sedentary,
control
overweight
/obese men
& women
(18-70yrs)

32
weeks

Aerobic
DEXA
Resistance
Combined

Sillanpaa
et al.

Randomized Men (40control

65yrs)

21
weeks

Aerobic
DEXA,
Resistance BIA
Combined

Taking
time into
account,
Aerobic
training is
optimal
Optimal
benefits
with
Combined
training

Park et
al.

Randomized Obese
control
women
(40-45yrs)

24
weeks

Control
Aerobic
Combined

DEXA,
BOD AIR

Inbody

Optimal
benefits
with
Combined

studies. Dolezal & Potteigers studied active young men ranging from 19-21yrs old,
Sanal, Ardic, & Kirac studied sedentary, overweight/obese men and women between 2040yrs old, Ho, Dhaliwal, Hills, Pal studied sedentary, overweight/obese men and women
ranging from 40-66yrs old, Willis et al. studied sedentary, overweight/obese men and
women between 18-70yrs old, Sillanpaa et al. studied sedentary men ranging from 4065yrs old, and Park et al. studied obese middle-aged women between 40-45yrs old.
Drawing conclusions about the most beneficial exercise regimen to induce positive body
composition and RMR changes may be difficult considering exercise recommendations
may differ among younger adults and older adults or among trained healthy adults and
sedentary overweight/obese adults ect. (Peterson et al, 2011).

Gender must also be

taken into consideration; women tend to preserve their fat mass and energy balance more
strongly than men (Westerterp, 1992).
The type of exercise performed in each study, the length of each training session,
and the duration of each study were key factors that varied among the six studies
evaluated. The aerobic training exercises ranged from jogging or running (Dolezal &
Potteiger, Willis et al.), riding a leg cycle ergometer (Sanal et al., Sillanpaa et al.), or a
combination of several different aerobic exercises (Ho et al, Park et al.). The frequency
of sessions and length of time spent training was another large variance. Dolezal and
Potteiger had subjects train 3 days a week, progressively increasing intensity and duration
and having the combined training group perform twice the amount of exercise as each of
the aerobic and resistance training groups. Sanal et al. had subjects in the AT group
increase the number of days they trained per week (from 3-5) as well as the intensity and
duration of training and had the combined training group do the same with the addition of

2 days per week of resistance training. Ho et al. kept the training regimen constant
throughout the study and different training groups with each performing 30 minutes of
exercise 3 days per week. Willis et al. assigned the AT group the equivalent of
~12miles/week of training, required 3 days of training per a week for the RT group, and
had the combined training group complete both of the full AT and RT regimens.
Sillanpaa et al. had participants in the AT group train twice weekly increasing both
intensity and duration and had the combined training group follow the same regimen with
the addition of 2 days of resistance training per week. Park et al. had all participants train
for 60 minutes 6 days per week increasing intensity and had the combination group
perform half the AT regimen and half the RT regimen. The duration of each study may
also play a large role in the outcome measures. Its hard to compare a study with a
training period of 10 weeks (Dolezal & Potteiger) to a study over three times as long
(Willis et al.)
The measurement tools used throughout these studies may also need to be taken
into consideration when examining the validity of their results. For means of body
composition measurements, DEXA has been widely considered the gold standard due to
its quick and user-friendly nature whereas as BIA and Inbody have been known to be
insensitive to small body composition changes and prone to large predictive errors so
they tend to have limited clinical application (Duren, 2008). Also, some studies rely on
the validity of self-completed exercise logs and participant honesty, which may lead to
questions of accuracy. This also applies to the food frequency questionnaires used in
most studies; these FFQs are reliant upon subjects honesty and may not be sensitive

enough to detect changes in dietary intake which have the potential to largely interfere
with the results of the study.
Only one of the studies reviewed in this paper measured the RMR of subjects pre
and post training periods. Dolezal and Potteiger (1998) found that RMR increased along
with FFM or LBM among subjects in the RT and CT groups. Willis et al., Ho et al.,
Sanal et al., Sillanpaa et al., and Park et al. did not measure RMR but found increases in
FFM or LBM among participants in the RT and CT groups. Due to the fact that increases
in FFM or LBM theoretically increase RMR, these results may suggest that implementing
RT may potentially lead to beneficial changes in body composition and RMR.
There are very few large randomized controlled trials that study pure exercise
efficacy and include and examination of both aerobic training and the combination of
aerobic and resistance training. Further well-controlled studies may be needed to provide
better insight into what the proper type, intensity, and duration of training is needed for
optimal changes in body composition and resting metabolic rate. Changes in RMR, even
small changes, can have a significant effect over time on a persons overall energy
expenditure. Conducting studies that take into account factors that must be considered
age, gender, eating patterns, ectmay need to a better understanding of the most efficient
training modalities for the promotion of weight management and the prevention of
obesity.

References
BIODYNAMICS: Body Model. (n.d.). Retrieved October 28, 2014.
Bowerman, Susan (2014). Quick Guide to Body Composition, Lean BodyMass, and
Body Fat. Discover Good Nutrition. October 17, 2014.
http:www.discovergoodnutrition.com
Bogardus, C., Lillioja, S., Ravussin, E., Abbott, W., Zawadzki, J. K., Young,
A., ... & Moll, P. P. (1986). Familial dependence of the resting
metabolic rate. New England Journal of Medicine, 315(2), 96-100.
Broeder, C. E., Burrhus, K. A., Svanevik, L. S., & Wilmore, J. H. (1992).
The effects of either high-intensity resistance or endurance training on resting
metabolic rate. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 55(4), 802-810.
Byrne, Heidi and Wilmore, Jack H., "The Effects of a 20-Week Exercise Training
Program on Resting Metabolic Rate in Previously Sedentary, Moderately Obese
Women" (2001). Kinesiology, Sport Studies and Physical Education Faculty
Publications. Paper 79. http://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/pes_facpub/79
Can Diet and Exercise Really Change Metabolism? (2014, January 1).
Retrieved October 26, 2014.
Dictionary of Sport and Exercise Science and Medicine:
resting metabolic rate. (n.d.) Dictionary of Sport and Exercise Science and
Medicine by Churchill Livingstone. (2008). Retrieved October 16 2014 from
http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/resting+metabolic+rate
Dolezal, B. A., & Potteiger, J. A. (1998). Concurrent resistance and
endurance training influence basal metabolic rate in nondieting individuals.
Journal of applied physiology, 85(2), 695-700.
Duren, D. L., Sherwood, R. J., Czerwinski, S. A., Lee, M., Choh, A. C.,
Siervogel, R. M., & Chumlea, W. C. (2008). Body composition methods:
comparisons and interpretation. Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2(6),
1139-1146.
Ferraro, R., Lillioja, S., Fontvieille, A. M., Rising, R., Bogardus, C., &
Ravussin, E. (1992). Lower sedentary metabolic rate in women compared with
men. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 90(3), 780.
Fukagawa, N. K., Bandini, L. G., & Young, J. B. (1990). Effect of age on
body composition and resting metabolic rate. Am J Physiol, 259(2 Pt1), E233E238

Johnstone, A. M., Murison, S. D., Duncan, J. S., Rance, K. A., &

Speakman, J. R. (2005). Factors influencing variation in basal metabolic rate
include fat-free mass, fat mass, age, and circulating thyroxine but not sex,
circulating leptin, or triiodothyronine. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition,
82(5), 941-948.
J. Sklovsky, R. (2003, January 1). Bio-Impedance Analysis (BIA). Retrieved October
18, 2014. http://www.drbobnd.com/Bio-Impedance%20Analysis.htm
Kaslow, J. (n.d.). Body Impedance Assessment (BIA). Retrieved October 27, 2014.
http://www.drkaslow.com/html/body_impedance_assessment.html
Kelly, Mark P(2012). Resting Metabolic Rate: Best Ways to Measure ItAnd Raise It,
Too. ACE Council on Exercise. Retrieved on October 17, 2014.
http://www.acefitness.org
Kinucan, P., & Kravitz, L. (2006). in metabolism.Arciero, P. J., Goran, M. I., &
Poehlman, E. T. (1993). Resting metabolic rate is lower in women than in men.
Self, 1(6.1), 1-0.
Kraemer, W. J., & Fleck, S. J. (2007). Optimizing strength training:
designing nonlinear periodization workouts. Human Kinetics.
Kravitz, L., & Heyward, V. H. (1992). Getting a grip on body composition.
IDEA today, 10, 34-41.
Kravitz, L., & Malone, R. (1999). Training for weight management. IDEA Personal
Trainer, 10 (7), 17, 18.
Krieger, J. W., Sitren, H. S., Daniels, M. J., & Langkamp-Henken, B.
(2006). Effects of variation in protein and carbohydrate intake on body mass and
composition during energy restriction: a meta-regression. The American journal
of clinical nutrition, 83(2), 260-274.
metabolic rate in lean and moderately obese individuals.
International journal of obesity, 10(6), 511-517.
L'Heureux, J. (2006, January 1). HIV Nutrition Education. Retrieved October 28, 2014.
hivcommission-la.info/guidelines_implementing.pdf
Manore, M., Meyer, N. L., & Thompson, J. (2009). Sport nutrition for health
and performance. Human Kinetics.

McIver, C. M., Wycherley, T. P., & Clifton, P. M. (2012). MTOR signaling

and ubiquitin-proteosome gene expression in the preservation of fat free mass
following high protein, calorie restricted weight loss. Nutr Metab, 9, 83.
M D Mifflin, S T St Jeor, L A Hill, B J Scott, S A Daugherty, and Y O Koh. A new
predictive equation for resting energy expenditure in healthy individuals. Am J
Clin Nutr 1990 51: 2 241-7
Nelson, K. M., Weinsier, R. L., Long, C. L., & Schutz, Y. (1992). Prediction
of resting energy expenditure from fat-free mass and fat mass. The American
journal of clinical nutrition, 56(5), 848-856.
Park, S. K., Park, J. H., Kwon, Y. C., Kim, H. S., Yoon, M. S., & Park, H. T.
(2003). The effect of combined aerobic and resistance exercise training on
abdominal fat in obese middle-aged women. Journal of physiological
anthropology and applied human science, 22(3), 129-135.
Peterson, M. D., Sen, A., & Gordon, P. M. (2011). Influence of resistance
exercise on lean body mass in aging adults: a meta-analysis. Medicine and science
in sports and exercise, 43(2), 249.
Poehlman, E. T. (1989). A review: exercise and its influence on resting
energy metabolism in man. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 21(5),
515-525.
Poehlman, E. T., Dvorak, R. V., DeNino, W. F., Brochu, M., & Ades, P. A.
(2000). Effects of Resistance Training and Endurance Training on Insulin
Sensitivity in Nonobese, Young Women: A Controlled Randomized Trial 1. The
Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 85(7), 2463-2468
Ryan, A. S. (2010). Exercise in aging: its important role in mortality, obesity
and insulin resistance. Aging health, 6(5), 551-563.
Sanal, E., Ardic, F., & Kirac, S. (2013). Effects of aerobic or combined
aerobic resistance exercise on body composition in overweight and obese adults:
gender differences. A randomized intervention study. European journal of
physical and rehabilitation medicine, 49(1), 1-11.
Shook, R. (2013). Associations between resting metabolic rate and energy storage in
young adults. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from
http://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/2340

Sillanpaa, A. H., Nyman, K., Mari, M., Cheng, S., Laura Karavirta, D. E., & Niina
Huuhka, W. J. (2008). Body Composition and Fitness during Strength and/or
Endurance Training in Older Men. Official Journal of the American College of
Sports Medicine, 0195-9131/08/4005-0950/0
Tremblay, A., Fontaine, E., Poehlman, E. T., Mitchell, D., Perron, L., & Bouchard, C.
(1985). The effect of exercise-training on resting metabolic rate in lean and
moderately obese individuals. International journal of obesity, 10(6), 511-517.
Variables that Affect Your Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR). (2014, January 1).
Retrieved October 27, 2014.
Wang, Z., Heshka, S., Gallagher, D., Boozer, C. N., Kotler, D. P., &
Heymsfield, S. B. (2000). Resting energy expenditure-fat-free mass relationship:
new insights provided by body composition modeling. American Journal of
Physiology-Endocrinology And Metabolism, 279(3), E539-E545.
Westerterp, K. R., Meijer, G. A., Janssen, E. M., Saris, W. H., & Hoor, F. T.
(1992). Long-term effect of physical activity on energy balance and body
composition. British Journal of Nutrition, 68(01), 21-30.
Willis, L. H., Slentz, C. A., Bateman, L. A., Shields, A. T., Piner, L. W.,
Bales, C. W., ... & Kraus, W. E. (2012). Effects of aerobic and/or resistance
training on body mass and fat mass in overweight or obese adults. Journal of
Applied Physiology, 113(12), 1831-1837.
Wilmore, J. H. (1996). Increasing physical activity: alterations in body mass
and composition. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 63(3), 456S-460S.