H =3:__;_:_::__:_:_£5313: . r. IN C t. O! . ‘ o.. .r 7 vs .4“ - .9 JG If ‘y .T. cc? .— W. 'K n I :34 7 ' II. 1 . haw THE EFFECT OF QUADRICEPS DEVELOPMENT ON SPRINT RUNNING TIME by RICHARD CHARIES ngLLEME A THESIS Submitted to the College of Education of Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in.partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Health, Phyeical Education and Recreatien 1955 ABSTRACT Title‘g; study. The Effect of quadriceps.Development on Sprint Running Time. _ Statement 2; problem. To evaluate the influence of pro- gressive resistance exercise on quadriceps development and sprint running time. gethodolggy. Two groups of four subjects each.matched in seventy-five yard sprint times were tested in this study. The experimental group consisted of two freshmen track candi- dates and two members of a track and field class. The experi- mental group participated in a progressive resistance exercise program. This program consisted of meeting four days a week and performing a knee extension exercise for both right and left legs. At the end of each week a l R.M. was determined and recorded. the control group consisted of one freshmen.track can, didate and three members of a track and field class who did not participate in.progressive resistance exercise. ‘All sub- jects participated in daily track training and were tested Wednesday and Friday of each week for seven weeks. A.two Sweek layoff was brought about because of a between term ' school vacation and took place between week four and week five. ii The testing program consisted of measuring each Wednes- day, thigh girth develOpment and tension strength. Friday was set aside for testing seventybfive yard dash times and also de- termining and recording of one R.M. for the experimental group only. The data was presented graphically and tested statisti- .cally by the analysis of variance. When "F" values were significant, small sample "t" tests were utilized to further analyze the data. ggnclusiong. The following conclusions are drawn from the basis of the data presented in the study. Any interpreta- tion of these conclusions should be in light of the limitations of the study. 1. frogressive resistance exercise even above the weight loads used in knee exercises had no deleterious effect on sprint running times in either the twenty or seventy-five yard dashes. The trends, in fact, were toward faster times but insignificantly so. 2. No significant differences between groups were found in knee extension strength, as measured by the cable tensiometer. 3. There was a significant increase (F a 12.1 and 32.5 at the 1% level) in one mm. values, from initial to final test, in the experimental group. On the basis of the present study no conclusions can be drawn as to whether this significant increase was due to running or weight training. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer wishes to express his grateful acknowledge ment to his adviser, Dr. W. D. Van.Huss, for his professional guidance, criticisms, and valuable suggestions rendered in this study. To Dr. H3 Montoya for help and advice given in setting up the timing apparatus, acknowledgment also. Thanks are extended to the subjects who cooperated in this study to the fullest extent. The author is deeply indebted to his wife, marilyn, for her valuable assistance in the final preparation of the study. R. c. o. DEDICATION This thesis is respectfully dedicated to my wife, 'Marilyn, and to my two daughters, Michele and Marcy. TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract . . . . . ‘Acknowledgments . Table of Contents List of Tables . . List of Figures . List of Charts . . CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . Statement of the problem, . Need for the study . . . . Limitations of the study . Defimti one 0 O O O C O O 0 II. RELATED LITERATURE . . . . . Introduction to progressive exercise . . . . . . . . resistance Purpose and need for progressive resistance exercise ... . Exercise effects on.muscle Studies related to weight training . . III. RESEARCH METHODS . . . . . . Source of data . . . . . . Nethod ......... Selection of measures . . Selection of subjects . . The experimental factor . Testing routine . . . . . PAGE iv vii viii -s a: to P’ F4 Id 1:5 1:5 1:5 13 14 14 15 vi CHAPTER PAGE Testing techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Thigh girth measurement . . . . . . . . . . 16 Cable tension strength . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Strength measurement (One R.M.) . . . . . . 16 Twenty and seventy-five yard dash . . . . . 19 Timing device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Method of exercise . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Statistical technique . . . . . . . . . . . 23 IV. PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA . . . . . . . 24 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Treatment of data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Presentation of data . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Testing results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Seventy-five yard dash results . . . . . . . 25 Twenty yard dash results . . . . . . . . . . 26 Cable tension strength results . . . . . . . 28 One R.M~ results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Thigh girth measures results . . . . . . . . 34 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . 38 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 TABLES PAGE TABLE I I . values 0f t'F" Tea-t8 O O O O O O O O O O O O . O 33 LIST OF FIGURES * PAGE FIGURE 1. Timing Equipment Used During the Experiment . . . l7 2. Cable Tension Strength‘Test Equipment Used During the Experiment . . . . . . . . . . 18 3. Measuring Cable Tension Strength . . . . . . . . 2O 4.TimingUnit...................21 5. Photoelectric Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 LIST OF CHARTS CHART ' PAGE I. Time in the 75 Yard Dash (Mean Scores) . . . . . 27 II. Time in the 20 Yard Dash (Mean Scores) . . . . . 27 III. Cable Tension Strength - Right Leg (MeanScores)................50 IV. Cable Tension Strength Left Leg (MeanScores) ................ 30 V. l R.M. Strength Measurement - Right Leg (MeanScores)................ 32 VI. 1 R.M. Strength Measurement - Left Leg (Mean Scores) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Knee injuries have long been a threat to athletes. The knee is one of the weakest joints in the body for the pressure put on it and for this reason, many athletes are plagued with knee injuries. Progressive resistance exercise has been one of the more successful clinical approaches to stabilize weakened knees. Statement _o_f the problem. To evaluate the influence of progressive resistance exercise on quadriceps develOpment and sprint running times. Need £9; 13113 M. The effect of progressive resist- ance exercise on sprint running time has not been established. The question of how much progressive resistance exercise can be given an individual without slowing him down has been a constant problem to the clinical peeple, coaches, trainers, and the athletes. DGLormel has pointed out that quadriceps muscles to be- come powerful enough to maintain the stability of the knee without help of the ligament, must have greater than normal 1 T. L. DOLorme, "Restoration of Muscle Power by Heavy Resistance Exercise," The Journal of 13er an___c_1_ Joint Sur 273 October, 1945, Pa .656. power built in the involved extremity. Therefore, extremely heavy resistance must be used in cases dependent on.muscular support of the knee. It is hoped this study, in a small way, will contribute insight to the amount of weight which can be safely used with athletes dependent on.running speed. Limitations 2; the study. 1. Size of samples. This study was performed with four experimental and four control subjects matched on seventy-five yard running times. 2. Psychological factor. It is difficult to determine whether the subjects are performing maximum lifts or running maximum speed. It is felt, however, errors of this type are at a minimum. 3. One R.M. measure. The one R.M. has its limitations as a means of a strength measurement, principally due t3 the difficulty in determining exactly when the knee is straight. 4. Control group. A.maximum contraction was per- formed once per week on the tensiometer which has some bearing on increased strength, therefore, adding some bias to the data. Definitions. The following are defined briefly for use in this study. Progressive Resistance Exercise - For use in this study, the term progressive resistance exercise refers to load- resisting knee extension exercise. A boot attached to a short bar on which weights are placed, is strapped to the foot and used to exercise the quadriceps muscles. 3 Load-Resisting Exercises - "This term (load-resisting exercise) refers to those in which the exercise load resists the muscle."2 Ten.R.M. - The maximum weight which can be lifted cor- rectly for ten repetitions. One R.Ms - The maximum weight which can be lifted to complete knee extension once. 2 T. L. DeLorme and A. L. Watkins, Pro ressive Resistance Exercise, (New Ybrk: AppletonPCenturybCrofts, Inc., 1951,) pa 0 CHAPTER.II RELATED LITERATURE Nowhere in the human body is the functional integrity of a joint so dependent upon muscle support as it is in the knee. It is true that with a weak quadriceps muscle the individual may be denied very few ordinary daily activities. Introduction _t_q progressive resistance exercise. DeLorme and Watkinsz pointed out that progressive resistance exercise principles and technics as they are now employed therapeutically had their inception in World War II. Due to the urgent need for hospital beds and speedier rehabili- tation of the wounded, this type of exercise was developed in Gardiner General Hospital, Chicago, Illinois, in the spring of 1944. DeLorme, West, and Shibers studied the effect of pro- gressive resistance exercise on the knee following femoral fractures of soldiers at Gardiner General Hospital. It was 1 T. L. DeLorme and A. L. Watkins, o ressive Resist- ance Exerci ,(New York: Appleton-Century ro e, no., I951), —_125. 2 3Ebide, pp. 1-50 3T. L. DeLorme, P. E. West, and l. J. Shiber, “Influence of Progressive Resistance Exercise on Knee Function Following Femoral Fractures," The Journal p_f Bone and Joint Sur er , 322A: October, 1950,_ p. 5 determined that progressive resistance exercise had aided in faster recovery and more rapid restoration of muscle power. The scope of progressive resistance exercise has steadily widened since its inception with rehabilitation of veterans of world War II.‘ The age limits of progressive resistance exercise applications have been extended to include, not only the army age group, but the very young and the aged.5 The old term of heavy resistance exercise led to much false interpretation as found by DeLorme and Watkins.6~ The false interpretation that only great poundage was used. and that a muscle initially must have nearly normal power, led to the change in name to progressive resistance exercise. m _a_nd_ 3.1.9.99. 33;; progessive‘ resistance exercise- Progressive resistance exercise is used, primarily, for in- creasing strength. This exercise is based on the sound phys- iological principle that in order to rapidly improve muscular strength, one must contract against a resistance which will ‘ T. L. DeLorme, "Recent Developments in Progressive Resistance Exercise," American Academ of Ortho edic Surgeons Instructional Course ectures, (Captor-VIII, Progressive Resistance fiercise, & Iffior, Michigan: J. W. Edwards, 1950), p. 225e 5 Ibid. 6 T. L. DeLorme and A. L. Watkins, “Technics of Progressive gggstancegxercise," Echives p; PhysicalMedicine, 29: Hay, , p. 2 . . 6 elicit a near maximal voluntary effort. The resistance must be progressively increased.7 8 DeLorme found exercise to be essential in restoring function to muscles, which were weakened and .atrophied as a result of injury and disease. DeLorme states: Most injuries of the thigh and knee result in atrophy of quadriceps of varying degree. When the local injury has healed, redevelOpment of quadriceps power is the most important factor in restoring normal function of the extremity.9 Gallagher, Andover, and DeLormelo note that the tend- ency for knee injuries to recur is known and that it is all inportant to ' combat the atrophy and hypotnia of the extensor muscles of the thigh. It is further stated: Progressive resistance exercise can restore the power lost, and can produce a much greater strength in the supporting muscles thafithey possessed prior to the incited injury. 7 A. L. Watkins, ”Practical Applications of Progressive Resistance Exercise,” Journal of American Medical Association, 14-8: February, 1952,.p. 113. '- 8 T. L. DeLorme, “Restoration of Muscle Power by Heavy Resistance Exercise," The Journal _o_f Bone _a_n_d_ Joint m, 27: October, 1945, p. .515. 9 jbi . 1° J. R. Gallagher, Andover, and r. L. DeLorme, urn. Use of the Techniques of Progressive Resistance Exercise. in Adolescents " The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 31: OCLOber, 19191-5:- 8:7. - ’ . 11 gbid. 7 12 point out the knee joint is not Robertson and Hawk a simple hinge and that the quadriceps are the most active stabilizers of the joint. There seems to be ample evidence in the litera- ture, and in our own experience, to prove conclusive- ly that the quadriceps muscle group {Erma the first line of defense against knee injury. Eercise effects 93 muscle. Wakiml" pointed out that exercises which are regular and systematic, and of heavy nature will tend to thicken and toughen.the sarcolemma of muscle fibers and increase the amount of connective tissue within the muscle. There is an increase in.musc1e size, but not an increase in the number of muscle fibers. DeLorme and Watkins15 further emphasize that there is an increase in the number of capillaries, and the content of muscle hemoglobin, phosphocreatine, and glycogen. When systematic progressive exercise is carried on for a sufficiently long period of time, ability to do work is 12 T. S. Robertson and J. M. Hawk, "Corrective Therapy in the Surgicalenee," The Journal 2; the Association for h sical and.Mental Rehabilitation, V01. 6, No. 1, Septemberu 0c¥05er, I952, p. 7. 13 The Knee, (Gardner, Kansas: The Cramer Chemical Company, no date) p. 23. . . 141K. G. Hakim, .The Physiological Aspects of Thera- peutic Physical Exercise," The Journal 2; the American Medical Agsociation, 142: 2: January—I4, I955, pp.-IU4-IU5. 15 T. L. peLerme, and A. L. Watkins, pp. g_i_t., p. 14. augmented.16 It is further determined that when graphed against time, the slope gradient of the training curve will vary from individual to individual as well as the peak de- velOpment attainable. Studies related 2.9. £3551; training. (:hui17 studied twentybthree subjects engaged in weight training two to three times weekly for one hour, compared with twenty-two subjects participating in a required physical education program. The study heped to ascertain some pertinent facts covering the effects systematic weight training had on athletic power. The weight training subjects showed a slight improvement over the required physical education group in body weight, the Sargent jump, the eight and twelve pound shot put, and sixty yard dash. In the sixty yard dash the weight training group improved speed of 0.33 seconds. The mean improved from 7.9 to 7.57 seconds. One subject lost in speed 0.1 seconds. The physical education group's speed went from 8.05 to 8.1 seconds showing loss of speed of 0.05 seconds. Chui concluded that the subjects engaged in weight training improved over the control group and that results indicated the probability of 16 T. L. DeLorme and A. L. Watkins, poo. c_i_t. 17 Edward Chui, "The Effect of Systematic Weight Trainp ing on.Athletic Power," Research Qu uterly, 21: October, 1950, 9 increasing speed through systematic weight training, although no statistical significance was shown. 18 in.a similar experiment compared a weight Capen training group to a required physical education.group. The weight training group showed greater general improvement in muscular strength, although there were no statistically sig- nificant differences between the two groups in muscular strength (MbCloy's Revision), muscular endurance (chinning, pushpups, sit-ups, and squat jumps), and circulo-endurance (300 yard shuttle run) or in athletic power. The weight training group did, however, excel the required physical education group in all final scores, though not significantly due to the differ- ence in initial scores. Capen concluded that the weight train~ ing group improved more in speed events than the required physical education group. Zorbas and Karpovich19 studied six hundred men, ages 18 to 30 years, in an effort to determine the effects of training with weights on speed of muscular contraction. Two groups were used, the control group consisted of 300 men who never indulged in weight training, the experimental group consisted of 300 men who had participated in weight training for a minimum of six months and still were engaged in.this activity. 0* 18 E. K. Capen, "The Effects of Systematic Weight Train- ing on.Power, Strength, and Endurance,” Research Quarterly, 21: May, 1954, pp. 83-93. . 19 W. S. Zorbas and P. V. Karpovich, "The Effect of Weight Lifting upon the Speed of Muscular Contractions," Research Quarterly, 22: May, 1951, pp. 145-148. 10 A specially constructed apparatus for recording speed of rotary movements of the arm was used for measurement. Each group had two trials with three minutes of rest between tests. The lowest recorded time in seconds was used.. The weight lifting group was concluded'to be faster in speed than the non-lifters, although no statistical significance was shown. DeLorme, Ferris, and Gallagher20 studied the effects of progressive resistance exercise on muscle contraction time. Elbow flexion and knee extension were studied in ten adolescent boys. Two groups consisting of five boys in an exercise group and five boys as controls were used. The exercise group was given progressive resistance exercise four times a week for four months. Elbow flexion and knee extension was measured on an electric clock calibrated in and accurate to within 1/100ths seconds. one R.n.'s were determined for biceps, knee extension, and hip-knee extension, while circumferential upper arm and thigh measurements at the beginning and end of the experimental period were taken. It was concluded that following the progressive resistance exercise period there was an increase in circumferential measures and a consider- able increase in knee extension and elbow flexion one R.M. 2° T. L. DeLorme, B. G. Ferris, and J. R. Gallagher, “Effects of Progressive Resistance Exercise on Mueuclar Contraction Time," Archives p_f Physical Medicine, 33: February, 1952, pp. 85- 92. 11 The results of the post-exercise contraction.time tests showed no evidence of slower times for the exercise group. No statis- tical significance was shown.in this study. Wilkins21 tested three groups as a means of finding the effects of weight training on speed of movements. The first group consisted of an elementary weight lifting class with no previous experience: the second group was madeup of chronic weight lifters with an average of two and a half years experience: the third group, a control group, was taken from an elementary swimming class and a golf class. .All groups were tested on an arm movement recording ap- paratus. A bicycle crank with a radius of 7-1/4 inches was mounted on a frame and attached to the wall. The axis of the crank was 58 inches from the floor. There was no resistance other than the ball bearings used. Hand grips were made from the taped pedal sleeves. .An electric counter set at fifteen second intervals was used to count the number of revolutions the subjects made. Both hands were used. The elementary weight lifters and the control group improved the same from the first test to the retest. The trend of data appears to be toward weight training improving speed. 21 B. m. Wilkins, "The Effects of Weight Training on Speed of Movement," Research uarterl , 23: October, 1952, pp. 361-369e . . 12 working with three groups; a beginning weight lifting class, a volley ball class, and a sports lecture class, studied the effect Masley, Hairabedian, and Donaldsonzz of systematic weight training on coordination and speed of movement. Speed was determined by twenty-four clockwise revolutions of the arm in a frontal plane in seconds. The apparatus used was similar to the hand crank of Zorbas and Karpovich.23 at a copper disc for speed and accuracy. Strength was tested The coordination test consisted of a foil test by McCloy's revision of Roger's Strength Index. The weight training class improved in strength, speed, and coordination over the two other groups, although no statistical significance was shown.. It was concluded that weight training had no ap- parent deleterious effect on the subjects. 22 J. v. Masley, A. Hairabedian, and D. N. Donaldson, "Weight Training in Relation to Strength, Speed, and Coordina- tion," Research Quarterly, 24: October, 1953, pp. 3089-315. 1 7 23 W. S. Zorbas and P. V. Karpovich,‘Qp. 913., pp. 146- 4 . CHAPTER III RESEARCHCMETHODS This study was designed to determine the effect of pro- gressive resistance exercise on quadriceps development and sprint running time. In.addition to determining the effect of progressive resistance exercise.on sprint running time, it was hoped that some determination could be made of the amount of quadriceps weight training which could be safely given athletes dependent on.running speed without being deleterious to them. I. SOURCE OF DATA Method. The experimental method of research was used as diagramed: Experimental group T.I ‘ T2 Te_ T4 ‘ Rest .°* 2 wks. . Control group T1 T2 T3 T4 The subjects were matched on their respective seventyb five yard times. The times used for matching purposes were the best of two trials. Selection 2; measures. The twenty, as well as the seventy-five yard dash, was used to gain further insight into the effects the weight training had on sprint running. The cable tensimmeter strength measure was utilized for both groups l4 and the one R.M. measure as an additional strength measure for the experimental group. §electionfi2gdsubjectg. .A large number of subjects were tested at the beginning of the experiment. The subjects fi- nally selected consisted of Michigan State University fresh, men track candidates and members of an individual athletic (track and field class) physical education class. Two groups of matched subjects in seventy-five yard dash time were se- lected from these tests. The experimental group consisted of two freshmen track candidates and two members of a track and field class. The control group consisted of one freshman track candidate and three members of a track and field class. All subjects were participating in training for track. Th2 eiperimental 35232;. .A progressive resistance ex- ercise program for quadriceps develOpment was set up for each subject in the experimental group. The program.consisted of the experimental group meeting four days a week and performing knee extension.exercise on both right and left legs. The ex- ercise was accomplished by determining the one RJM. for each subject, subtracting five pounds, and haVing the subject lift this weight for three sets of ten repetitions with a rest be- tween each set.1 1 K. K. Klein and E. Johnson, “Research: A Method of Determining the Maximum Load for Ten Repetitions in Progres- sive Resistance Exercise for quadriceps Development," Journal .o_f; fihysical _a_n_d_ Mental Rehabilitation, 7: July-August, I953, p. . . 15 The control group did not participate in any weight training program.but merely performed in their track train, ing program. EEEEEEB routine. All subjects met Wednesday of each week for testing on the following measures: 1) thigh girth measurement, 2) cable tension strength (right and left leg), and Friday for testing, 3) maximum strength (experimental group), 4) twenty yard dash, and 5) seventy-five yard dash. The experiment was conducted for seven complete weeks with a two week layoff between.week four and week five. The two week layoff was principally brought about because of a between school term vacation. At the end of the two week layb off, training and testing was resumed. The experiment was stopped at the end of seven weeks on the recommendation of Dr. Feurig,a team physician.at Michigan State university, because of his feeling that the heavy weights (190 pounds) being used in the progressive resistance exercises (unilateral) might cause a slipping of the tibial tuberosity. 2 James Feurig, M. 1)., Team Physician, Michigan State university. 16 II. TESTING TECHNIQUES Thigh m measurement. The eight subjects were meas- ured for quadriceps girth deve10pment of both right and left legs. An anatomical mark was determined six inches above the patella and was held constant throughout the study. The sub- jects were instructed to stand and set the quadricepsmuscles. The measurement was taken with a tape measure and the circum- ference of each leg was read in inches. The measurement was made with the tape tight over contracted muscles. Cable tension .srtreggt . Cable tension strength meas- ures were made exactly as described by Clarke.‘5 See Figures 1 a; 2) Clarke“ found the coefficient of objectivity for this test to be between .92 and .97. §treggth measurement (One R.M. ). Each of the experi- mental subjects were measured weekly for maximum strength by one R.M. knee extension lift. A one R.M. was determined for both the right and left leg. The one R.M. determination was performed as prescribed by Klein and J ohnson.5 3 H. H. Clarke Cable Tension tre th Tests, (ChicOppe Massachusetts: Brown—Murphy Co., 1952?, pp. 3—'_' ’ 4 H. H. Clarke, "Objective Strength Tests of Affected Muscle Groups Involved in OrthOpedic Disabilities," Research Quarterly, 19: May, 1948, pp. 118-147. . 5 K. K. Klein and E. Johnson, Q23. Q_i__t_. l7 IIGURE l TIMING EQUIPMENT USED DURING THE EXPERIMENT Back row: Starting blocks attached to platform. Front row: Photoelectric Unit and Timing Unit. 18 IIGURE 2 GKBIE TENSION STRENGTH TEST EQUIPMENT USED DURING THE EXPERIMENT Back row from left to right: Tensiemeter and goniometer. Front row; Pulling strap with wire and chain attached. 19 Twenty Eng seventy-five Ed 51333. The eight subjects each Friday were tested for time in both the twenty and seventy- five yard dash and the time was recorded.* Each subject ran three twenty-yard dashes, one at a time, and an average of the three times were recorded. The seventy-five yard dash was re- corded by taking the best time of two trials. TM .d_e_y_i_c_e_. The timing device develoPed by Montoya, et al.,6 was used. The subject took his position on the start- ing blocks, depressing a micro-switch. A pre-set button on the timer was set and as the subject left the starting blocks the depressed micro-switch released, starting the electric timer. As the subject crossed the electric eye beam, at the finish line, the current was cut stopping the electric timer. p1 testing in LL13 m startling' times 33;}; _n_g;t_ involved, 921-1 running Elm 3333 recorded. Method 93 exercise. Knee extension with overload pro- duced by boot with weights was used as described by DeLorme7, with the following exception: A maximum single lift capacity was determined for each of the four subjects on right and left . See Appendix 6 H. J. Montoya, et al., "An Electric Track and Reaction Timer,” FIEP-Bulletin, 2: 1954, pp. 1-6. '7 T. L. DeLorme and A. L. Watkins, "Technics of Progres- sive Resistance Exercise," Archives of Physical Medicine, 29: May, 1948, p. 263. .-.—..-. “A-i-.__‘, _F- FIGURE 3 IEASURING CABLE TENSION STRENGTH 20 21 u u are ,Lea e . 9" I“."§l‘ t!‘ ‘y- 'e . D. 'L. » FIGURE 4 TIMING UNIT 22 FIGURE 5 PHOTOELECTRIC UNIT 23 legs. Five pounds were deducted from the single lift to ac- quire ten.RtM. capacity.8 All subjects participated in the track training pro- ‘§§atistical technigue. The differences between the ex- perimental and control groups and the differences within the groups from.the initial through the final test were evaluated using the analysis of variance technique.9 Where the analysis of variance results were found to 10 be significant, small sample ”t" tests were utilized to de- termine which differences were significant. 8 K. K. Klein and E. Johnson, Lo___c_:_. Ci____1_:_. 9 A. L. Edwards, Statistica1.Analy§is, (New Yerk: Rinehart and Company, 1915), p. 257. 10 Ibid., pp. 174-176. CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA The preceding chapters have discussed the statement of the problem, needs for the study, related studies, and the methods used in collecting the data. This chapter will give the results of the study indicated in the procedure described in Chapter III. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influp ence of progressive resistance exercise on quadriceps develop- ment and sprint running time. Because many believe that weight training is deleterious to speed, this study also haped to de- termine the amount of progressive resistance exercise which may be given athletes dependent on running speed. Methodology. The subjects used in this experimental study were divided into an experimental and control group. tour subjects were placed in each group, individually matched on their respective seventybfive yard sprint time. The experimental group only participated in a weight training program, consisting of knee extension exercises. Both groups remained on.a track training program. The testing program consisted of the following measures: 1) thigh girth measures, 2) cable tension strength (right and left leg), 25 3) maximum strength (experimental group only}: 4) twenty-yard dash, and 5) seventy-five yard dash. All measures were taken weekly for seven.weeks. Treatment'gg‘ggtg. All results were tabulated and dif- ferences within the groups from T1 through!!!4 were evaluated ‘using the analysis of variance technique. The small sample I"t" test was utilized for further analysis in all cases where the “F" values were significant. gresentation‘gf data. The data is presented graphical- ly and discussed as to the trends, findings, and statistical significance. The presentation is divided into two categories (I) the testing results, and (II) discussion. I. TESTING RESULTS '§gyentybfivelygygigggh.resu1ts. The results of the seventybfive yard dash are shown in Chart I. The differences from.T1 to T4 for each group were compared using the "F" test and were found not to be significantly (1 c 1.11 with 3 df) different. The ”F“ value computed on the experimental group's data alone also was not significant (F a 8.45 with 12 df). ‘ In the limitations of the study, chapter 1, it was brought out how difficult it is to determine whether the sub- jects are performing maximum.lifts or maximum running speed. The psychological factor seems to be evident in this study. 26 Two subjects of the experimental group are questionable, al- though they stated they were performing maximum.lifts and running maximum speed, the writer questions their performances. This observation, however, may or may not be correct. While the data bear it out, it is entirely possible that they were performing their best at the time but that there was inadequate motivation to stimulate them to better performances. An analysis of variance was calculated for between row values (subject's repeat test values), for the seventy-five yard dash. The "I" value found in this analysis of variance was 4.57, sig- nificant at the 5% level. The significance holds little mean- ing for the over-all study other than to substantiate the writer's observation as to the differences in subjects. It is important to remember, however, that although no statistically significant improvement was found in the seventyb five yard dash results, the experimental group did not slow down in their time. Th3 effects 23 progressive resistance 35? £92.33 3353 £93; deleterious 1:3 3.1.29.1.- The trends, in fact, are in the opposite direction (faster times) but not significantly so in this study. ’ Twenty,y§£g‘gggh results. The results of the twenty yard dash can be seen in Chart II, page 27. The "I" value found in differences between groups was not significant (F s 1.32 with 3 df). The small sample "t" value also calculated for the experimental group only yielded a value of 3.31 not significant at the 5% level. -.-- +H-- ----.-.- 1 -- - «....-- e ‘ A e 0 I . . _ . . . a a . . . a I‘ — ....... . _ . . IhblL ..v It i I . . . I . u . . 4 on is n e I. . pl cl u . , i . 1 e . . . . y . . . . .l e . . . . e e, .r a a I s a ,. , . C . 1 I . I v S a . . , . I I. v I . . . O s e u u.,t. , L O . ., i _ . a it o I 1 Q . e . 4 . .v t.‘ e io.lw¢.l‘.. e' i c ire- .9 .~.. ISII . \c 4.. II. n \ '4 v 4‘,- e e o. . . . . . i e 4 u a . i y e a . V. A . , e .. e . v: D e a . .. a. y u .. p . 4 . . ,n e \ w. e ’ a n . . a . . . , . u- e . q , . . N . . _ . e , e . i . , . . . . . . a . x . ...: . . .9 4 . a e . . . r e _ . a . . . .t .. .. x. . - e a e . . \ a e I . i e 1 e V e . . 1 i . e i - . Q . e v . ... a . 1o. - y , -... 2 it . v- : . 1 . 11¢. . a . a . . . v . . ..re. 1 .. I . u .e o a . r __ . . 4 u a a . e i a , . . . . e . . . _ .. F . i v. . . . v a .. . . c . n . . ._ . n , . . . . . e nu. . 28 The small sample "t" test was worked out for the writer's interest in the twenty yard dash. The «t- value obtained in the T1 versus T2 in analysis for the experimental group was 6.0, significant at the 1% level. Comparing the T4 results of the experimental group and control groups, a small sample "t'I value of 3.95 (3 df) significant at the 5% level was obtained. The "t" test results in this study are confusing as the significance obtained in the small sample "t" tests were due not to significant differences in the mean, but rather be- 1 in indication of this was shown in the between row "F" test analysis of the cause of the differences in the variances. seventy-five yard dash data. In the twenty yard dash results as in.the seventybfive yard results, a slight, but insignificant change was noted in the experimental group's speed. The mean score for the experi- mental group between T1 and T‘ in twenty yard dash.times were 2.85 to 2.73 seconds, an increase of speed of .15 seconds. The control group's time for T1 and T4 was 2.89 to 2.81 seconds respectively, an increase in speed of .09 seconds. The in, crease of the experimental group as compared to the control group was not statistically significant. The "F" obtained in analyzing the differences between groups was 1.32 (3 df). gable tension streggth.resu1ts. The results obtained in.cab1e tension strength for the right and left legs are shown in chart III and chart Iv. 1 A. I. Edwards, tatistical Anal sis, (New York: Rinehart and Company, 19 , p. . . 29 The differences between groups using the "F“ test was found for tension strength for both right and left-“legs. The "F" value found for the right leg was.not significant (F e 1.07, 12 df). Likewise, the "I" value found for the left leg was not significant (F e 1.11, 3 df). The analysis of variance was also computed independently for the experimental and control groups. The "I" value found for the experimental group for the right leg strengths, was significant at the 5% level (I a 4.15, 3 df). The "F" value calculated for the left leg results was not significant (P s 2.75, 3 df). The "F" values for the control group showed no signif- icance for the right leg results (I . 2.7, 3 df), but signifi- cance at the 59: level was obtained in the left leg data (I n 3.56, 3 df). The control group was executing three maximum contrac- tions once per week during the tensiometer testing. In.the analysis of variance, the control group did increase strength significantly in the left leg, but not significantly in the right. It is possible the maximum.contractions elicited dur- ing the tensiometer testing have biased this phase of the data. How.much the data has been biased is not known but in the light of Hettinger andJMuller's2 work, it seems logical the three maximum.contractions may explain the lack of significant difb ferences in strength improvement. 2 Th. Hettinger and A. E. Muller, "Muskelleistung und Muskeltraining,“iggbeitsphysiologie, xw. No. 2: October, 1953, pp. 116-126. . . 30 '-'-V"~' .--..rH- .ee- . .7. I-.. _ . IeII. H . oti'e 1-- i ! ._..-;___...-.. TH' TREN .. . cells. I,/ . L. . . a e . ! UV . . l. v .4 . o l e .. e e . . u ..e e a! . .. . 4 .. I .... Fl ... ~ _ u e .. I a c . e . . . e K . 1. o. e V o . v i. s o e l . A . . \ .... n . . . r e ‘ C . . A e .1 1 l p F I e e . . -.. I u I . v a \ a - ,el 5. in. .e e‘ thallb‘.‘ . . a . \ a .... a e In! a .. A . i! .. i e . L . ‘ M . . e a 5 _ _ n k — D a .. . I . . e . . . e. - a s. . . I. . .b . a . . .10 _.\. i e h I. .1 e. _ a T e e\ . . e _ , . a a I“ . ’(I (4.04... - .0‘ tries. ’.I.‘O.| . l1ln is . , . I e . . ; e. a . \\ ck \V. e K. . e I“ . g . O o I I 0 . r n pl ‘ . ‘l | ‘1... e e a a a . p- . e . e a «I .. l a l . . .l. r . . a . e O n n. t ...“ i'u . \Vev ‘. . . a. . mutt! .~ \. .t t is... «4 e. r. e A > .a 1 . e . . ...vl . . e . . . . Is. a . e e e . a q .. e y. -~a‘- 31 292 g._ll_._ results. The results of the experimental groups one R.M. strength measures are shown in Chart V and Chart VI. In calculating the analysis of variance for the exper- imental group one R.M. results, the "F" values were found to be highly significant for the right and left leg, 12.1 and 32.5 respectively at the 1% level with three degrees of freedom. In order to determine where the significance was, small suple "t“s were utilized. The small sample "t“s calculated for the right leg one R.M. data yielded 4.76 (3 df) in T1 ver- ans :2 data and 4.32 (3 df) in the 11 versus 524 data, both sig- nificant at the 5% level. the small sample "t“s calculated for the left leg one 3.15. data yielded a 5.22'(3 df) in the £1 versus 12 data and 3.81 (3 df) in the 1‘1 versus 14 data. Both values were sig- nificant at the 5% level. the analysis of variance and small sample "t" tests in, dicate a significant increase in dynamic strength'as measured by the one R.M. in the present study. It must be noted the one RM. is a 9.299145 strength measure. The differences in the one R.M. and the M strength measure of the tensiometer are of extreme interest. The data raise the question of how valid the cable tensiometer data are of w strength. It soon en- tirely possible that dynamic strength could inprove and static strength remain approximately the same. fhis point merits further investigation. ' 50'0- JII | I.! .lll. .‘I -.-~4 A VOIc. 33 ‘ 21.31.15: I VALUES OF "Fit TESTS Differences Experimental Control between group group IESTS groups data data 75 yard dash 1.11 8.43 20 yard dash 1.32 3.31 Tension strength Right leg 1.07 4015* 2027 Left leg 1.11 2.85 3.56* One RJE. 3181115 188 12005** Left leg 32.65** —;.__ n:— L: ‘ * Significant at 5% level. ** Significant at 1% level. 34 Thigh girth measures results. The thigh girth measures were not used because of their apparent unreliability. Though the measurements were made six inches above the top of the patella over contracted quadriceps with the tape pulled tight, they fluctuated and did not improve. The author observed the contracted quadriceps was higher on the leg during maximum contraction as the strength measures were increasing. How much this may have affected the girth measures is not known. II. DISCUSSION Two limitations of this study seemed to have some appar- ent effect on the results. The psychological factor was observed in the experimental group. Although all the subjects seemed to be performing maximum.lifts and running maximum.speed, two of the subjects showed very little improvement in both strength and speed. It was felt by the writer that these two subjects were not performing maximum lifts. It is possible that though these subjects were lifting what was maximum for them at the time that there was insufficient motivation to obtain.maximum performances. Though all experimental subjects lifted equal- ly, two made excellent improvements (subject E. C. 84 to 190 and D. W. 192 to l85.)_and two little improvement (subject M5 R. 122 to 155 and subjecth.IK. 100 to 152.). These results also added bias to the running times of the experimental group. Evi- dence to substantiate this observation was shown in the analysis of variance when differences between rows or subjects in the seventybfive yard dash times were calculated. The "F" value 35 of 4.57 (3 df) was significant at the 5% level, indicating a significant difference in subjects. The other limitation came about in the control group. The control group, although not participating in progressive resistance exercise, did increase leg strength, due to perform~ ing three all out maximum contractions once a week in the tens sion strength test. The "F" value of the analysis of variance showed the control group to increase left leg strength 3.56 at the 5% level. In utilizing a small sample “t", a value of 4.2 was found significant at the 5% level in Ti versus T4 for the control group. This increase in strength may have had some bearing on running time. The trend of the graphs on seventy-five and twenty yard dash times shows that the experimental made improvement in mean scores. The two week layoff had some effect on slowing the experimental group up in running time, although this was not statistically significant. It can be determined that with seven weeks of progres- sive resistance exercise, the dynamic quadriceps strength as measured by the one Rem. measure can be significantly increased. The "F” values of 12.1 and 32.5 respectively for right and left legs, are significant at the 1% level with three degrees of freedom. It is felt by the writer that if more all out efforts could be obtained from the subjects in both lifting and run- ning, by using rewards or other motivational techniques, sig- nificant results would be obtained in running times. This is 36 substantiated by the improvements made by the two subjects, E. C. and D. W., who were obviously more interested. Probably the most important single point in this study is that who hmwmaaaishealiqwmsfl- tained, which is a considerably heavier load than is used in progressive resistance exercise for the quadriceps group,‘3h3 £935 329 931 deleterious. _T_h_e_ trends, in $331, 91.2.9. 55 these 135515 y_e_r_g _t_oflg faster 933 _s_l_._o_w_e_r_ @323. These results are similar to those obtained in the earlier weight lifting studies.3’ 4’ 5’ 6’ 7 The tensiometer results are of extreme interest. An experimental group lifted maximally for seven weeks but there was g2 significant difference between groups. This failure to obtain significance is possibly explained by three maximum can- tractions executed once per week. 'Hettinger and Muller's8 3Edward Chui, “The Effect of systematic Weight Train- ing on Athletic Power," Research 9 Werly, 21: October, 1950, pp. 188-194. 4 E. Kt Capen, "The Effects of Systematic Weight Train- ing on Power, Strength, and Endurance,'I Research Q Merly, 21: my, 1954, pp. 83-93. 5 w. s. Zorbas and P. v. Karpovich, "The Effect of weight Lifting upon the Speed of’Muscular Contractions," Research Q Werly, 22:.May, 1951, pp. 145-148. 6 B. M3 Wilkins, "The Effects of Weight Training on Speed ogjlovement," Research Quarterly, 23: October, 1952, pp. 361- 3 9. - . 7 J. w. Hadley, A. Hairabedian, and D. N. Donaldson, "Weight Training in Relation to Strength, Speed, and Coordina- tion," Reseu uarterl , 24: October, 1953, pp. 308-315. 8 Th. Hettinger and A. E. Muller, Loc. Cit. 57 study lends further insight into this explanation. What re- mains unexplained, however, is why the one R.m. (dynamic lift- ing) values increased significantly in the experimental group and the tensiometer values were significant for the right leg only. It would seem from the data that it is possible to in- crease dynamic strength without significant changee in static strength. The writer feels the data in this study are insuf- ficient to draw conclusions but they are certainly sufficient to raise the question for further investigation. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS §umm§£y. The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of progressive resistance exercise on quadriceps develOpment and sprint running time. Two groups of four subjects each matched in seventy- five yard sprint times were tested in this study. The experi- mental group consisted of two freshmen track candidates and two members of a track and field class. The experimental group participated in a progressive resistance exercise program. This program consisted of meeting four days a week and performing a knee extension exercise for both right and left legs. .At the end of each week a l R.Mt was determined and recorded. The control group consisted of one freshmen.track can- didate and three members of a track and field class who did not participate in progressive resistance exercise. All sub- jects participated in.daily track training and were tested Wednesday and Friday of each week for seven weeks. A two week layoff was brought about because of a between term school vaca- tion and took place between week four and week five. The testing program.consisted of measuring each Ibdnes- day, thigh girth development and tension strengths Friday was set aside for testing seventy-five yard dash times and also 39 determining and recording of one R.Mt for the experimental group only. The data was presented graphically and tested statistically by the analysis of variance. When."F" values were significant, small sample ”t" tests were utilized to fur- ther analyze the data. I Limitations of this study may have added some bias to the data because of the psychological factor involved in doing maximum lifts and running maximum speed. Also increase of strength may be obtained by performing a maximum contraction once per week in tension strength. gonclusion. The following conclusions are drawn on the basis of the data presented. Any interpretation of these con- clusions should be in light of the limitations of the study. 1. Progressive resistance exercise, even above the weight loads used in knee exercises, had no deleterious effect on sprint running times in either the twenty or seventy-five yard dashes. The trends, in fact, were toward faster times but insignificantly so. 2. no significant differences between-groups were found in knee extension strength, as measured by the cable tensio- meter. Possible reasons for these results have been discussed in the previous chapter. 3. There was a significant increase (F a 12.1 and 32.5 at the 1% level) in one R.M. values from initial to final test in the experimental group. On the basis of the present study 40 no conclusions can be drawn as to whether this significant in- crease was due to running or weight training. Recommendations. The recommendations of this study are as follows: 1. .Due to the small number of subjects used in this study, it is recommended that the same study should be repeated with more subjects. 2. It is recommended that a similar study be extended for a greater length of time. I1: 1.! 1 tell lull. I if. Ila-Ill BIBLIOGRAPHY .I.‘ '1‘! I‘ll II I III}. 42 .A. BOOKS Clarke, H. H., Cable Tension Stre th Tests, ChiOppe, Massachusetts: Brown-Murp y Company, I952. DeLorme, T. L., and A. L. Watkins, Progressive Resistance Exercise, New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1951. Edwards, A. L., Statistical Anal sis, New Yerk: Rinehart and Company, 1954. The Knee, Gardner, Kansas: The Cramer Chemical Company, No Date. 3. PERIODICALS capen, E..K., "The Effect of Systematic Weight Training on Power, Strength, and Endurance,“ ResearchLQuarterly, 2: 83-93, May, 1950. Chui, Edward, "The Effect of Systematic Weight Training on Athletic Power," Research.9uarterly, 21: 188-194, October, 1950. Clarke, H. H., "Objective Strength Tests of Affected Muscle Groups Involved in OrthOpedic Disabilities," Research DeLorme, T. L., “Restoration of Muscle Power b Heavy Resist- ance Exercise, The Journal of Bone and JL nt Surgery, 645, 667, October, 1951. DeLorme, T. 1., and A. L. Watkins, 'Technics of Progressive Resistance Exercise," Archives of Physical Medicine, 29: 263-273, May, 1948. DeLorme, T. 1., F. E. West, W. J. Shiber, “Influence of Progres- sive Resistance Exercise on.Knee Function.Following Femoral Fractures," The Journal of 9Bone and Joint §w gery, 32-A: 910-924- October,1 DeLorme, T. L., B. G. Ferris, and J. R. Gallagher, "Effect of Progressive Resistance Exercise on Muscular Contraction Time," The Archives of Physical medicine, 33: 86-92, February, _1 . Gallagher, J. R., Andover, and T. L. DeLorme, "The Use of the Technique of Progressive Resistance Exercise in.Adoles- cence," The Journal of Bone and Joint Sur er , 31-A: 847- 858, Octzbar, Hettinger, Th., and A. E. Muller, "muskelleistung and muskel- training," Arbeitsphysiologie, xv, no. 2: 116-126, October, 1953. 43 K1ein,.K..K., and E. Johnson, "Research: A.Method of Deter- mining the Maximum Lead, for Ten Repetitions, in.Progres- sive Resistance Exercises for quadriceps Development," The Journal of the Association for Ph sical and.Menta1 REEaBiIitation{”7? 7-15, JfiIy-August, I953.— HaSJ-ey, Jo W0, A. Hairabedian, and Do Us Donaldson, "Weight Training in Relation to Strength, Speed, and Co-ordination," Research.guarterly, 24: 308-315, October, 1953. lento e, H. J., et a1., "An.E1ectric Track and Reaction Timer," IEP—Bulletin, 2: 1-16, 1954. Robertson, T. 8., and J. M3 Hank, "Corrective Surgery in the Surgical.Knee,' The Journal of the Association for Physical and Menta I iReEaBiIitEtion, 6: 7- IO, October, Steinhaus, Arthur H., "Chronic Effects of Exercise,” Physio- logical Review, 13: 103-147, February, 1933. Wakim, K. G., "The Physiological Aspects of Therapeutic Physical Exercise," The Journal Lf the American.Medical Association, 142: 2: 101-110, January, 1950. Wilkins, B. H., "The Effect of Weight Training on Speed of movement," Research.guarterly, 23: 361-369, October, 1952. Zorbas, W. 8., and P. V. Karpovich, "The Effect of Weight Lifting Upon the Speed of Muscular Contractions," Research Quarterly, 22: 145-148, may, 1951. 0. ARTICLE IN COLLECTION DeLorme, T. L., "Recent Development in Progressive Resistance Exercise," American.Academ Lf Orthopaedic Sur eons InstructionaI Course Sectw mes, Ann Arbor, Mic gan: as We Edwarfig 1953’ 001'. 2, Chapter VIII, DP. 2259232. APPENDIX 45 . 3L: .. t x 8 L 8 , fi . a W. ... 2.. ... a: ... ... .5! ..a a: ... and .5 ”quill—j .. 2.. 2.. 0.. o.. ... ... ... .2. on. 13. .... ... o... 3.1 co. 8.. a a .. 2.. 0.. mar. .... 3. n! ...! ..a .3 .... .3 v.8 .... INN. ...! a a . o.. 8. 0.. ... ... t. .... 2a 2... I. 2.. ....- oQu .13.. flea a a o... 0.. ... 1... 0.. ... 3. 86 a... 2.. z... 2... 2... 2... 2.. 8.. a . fi B ‘ I Illa . n nj. z .2 .3 2.. .P ... E 2.. .5 .... .3 .... 2... .3 .3... ..JM a .2. ... oo. 8. .: ... 2. ...... on. ... 8.. ..N ...MI ... .... 5. a .. a .o. 0.. 2.. ... ... n... no. .5. 2... .3 on. a... ..m a.“ ..h it a J a o... .3 ... ... 2.. .u. S. .... 2a 2.. z... 2%. .... 2... .... id. 3 a .3 3. o.» ..u ... a: .0. an .... ....u 2... . .wdr .. «h 1.. . “I. . . ...; . 2 » LT: L01 .. 4P. k .. -..! n a. u z 2.. Jam. 2.. M ... S. ... ... can. . ... .... .... J- .nw. .MI. 8“. .... ...... z . 2 ... ... ... a 0.. ... .... t. 6.. 2.. .... .... ... .... .... 8.. 2.. .8... 2 . . 2 ... ... ... fl .... ... ... t. ...! .... 3.. on. Na .... on. on. .- flli a. .. ... ... ... M ... 8. 3. «a. .... 2.. .... .9. .... ...... .... .... .... .. 2 . 0.. 0.. ... ... 2.. 0.. 0.. .8... ... .... ... on. .... .... ... 4o. 2 . o . . .. r , .. . on. ... .3 no. ... ... 2.. Cal. L on. on. a... an. ... an. ... .34... . . 8. ... 2.. o.. .3 ... E a... o... .... ... 2.. 2... .... .5. .... . . co. ... ... .. . ... ... ... ...... ... 2... 1.. 2... .... 2... .... ...... . . o... .8 ... ... ... ... ... .... ...... ....» .s n .... .... .... .... .3... . ~ «2qu-«1 all...” ... ... Jew 8s .... 8. 3%. ..4. .31 .... .... ~ . . t .0. .... 46 $55.... a E. {II-.Irl. .... a fl '31 on on a . } L a 2 2.8 ...3 a: . E gm!!! 2 .. ... ...... 6% .... .... .... 2M .8. a _ a ......M .. ... ..o. 3. 3. .3. 5.. a . a a. .... .o. ....o .... ... .3. ... a a 3.. ... ... 3.. ...... .3. ...: do. a R R . a I J. n n a .... 3. . ...o. ....o. .5! a a .... no. ..o. .... ..... .... .... g... n a ..m... ... ... .... ...... .o. .. . ...! n a d. d. .d. .3. ...... .3. ...o. to Wag-415.; a .... .... .. ...... ... .... .... .... a .. 24 2 . ... ... ... 8. .... .M. a... ...... 2 2 M 0.. ... on. ... ... ... .o. .424... 2] 2 ,. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .... 2 2 1 ... 2.. 0.. ... ... ... ... .3 2 2 . ...... ... MT ...... .o. ...3 5.2.5... 0.. ... ... ... ... ... v. ...m. 2 2 .o. .... .. fl ... .. .... ...... ...... L 2 2 .3. .3. .o. P .... .o. d. ...... ...... 2 2 .o. .3. a. m .... ..d. .5. 6i; .2. 2 2 ... a. .. .1. .... 2... .. ... do. 2 . M . .... . a o I. h _ — Q . s . 4 h b. . ...d. 83. 29.. .3... ...... 2.3. £92.22... ... n... ..8. m .4... ...n. a... .... .5... . . ... ...o. .... .... ... .3. no. ...... ... . .. ... luv .1 ... ... ... .... n . [Id . .... ... a. ... ... av. . ..I.. .... .l . 6. no. a... 2 .... .2... .3 ... 2.. ... m ... o... ... .. .... . ~ .u . . ... d a. ... .... ... ... ... ... v. a. . . . . L . i.- ..o) ...- d... ...... ...... ....— ..2- .... ...... a... ...! .... {on .... .... .... ...... ... .... .... 4:. .... .... .... ... .... ... lawn—381.593. .. - .. . . _. Daté Du'e‘“: " Demco-293 .....__ MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LIBR I lllll ll; lllllllllll 3 1293 3 O3 7223 ARIES