{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0260347129506008, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011348464619492658, 'mean_word_length': 5.907834101382488, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Lengthening contractions are not required to induce protection from contraction-induced muscle injury.

We tested the hypothesis that lengthening contractions and subsequent muscle fiber degeneration and/or regeneration are required to induce exercise-associated protection from lengthening contraction-induced muscle injury. Extensor digitorum longus muscles in anesthetized mice were exposed in situ to repeated lengthening contractions, isometric contractions, or passive stretches. Three days after lengthening contractions, maximum isometric force production was decreased by 55%, and muscle cross sections contained a significant percentage (18%) of injured fibers. Neither isometric contractions nor passive stretches induced a deficit in maximum isometric force or a significant number of injured fibers at 3 days. Two weeks after an initial bout of lengthening contractions, a second identical bout produced a force deficit (19%) and a percentage of injured fibers (5%) that was smaller than those for the initial bout. Isometric contractions and passive stretches also provided protection from lengthening contraction-induced injury 2 wk later (force deficits = 35 and 36%, percentage of injured fibers = 12 and 10%, respectively), although the protection was less than that provided by lengthening contractions. These data indicate that lengthening contractions and fiber degeneration and/or regeneration are not required to induce protection from lengthening contraction-induced injury.