Chronobiology International

The Journal of Biological and Medical Rhythm Research

ISSN: 0742-0528 (Print) 1525-6073 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/icbi20

The effects of time of day-specific resistance

training on adaptations in skeletal muscle
hypertrophy and muscle strength: A systematic
review and meta-analysis

Jozo Grgic, Bruno Lazinica, Alessandro Garofolini, Brad J. Schoenfeld,

Nicholas J. Saner & Pavle Mikulic

To cite this article: Jozo Grgic, Bruno Lazinica, Alessandro Garofolini, Brad J. Schoenfeld,
Nicholas J. Saner & Pavle Mikulic (2019): The effects of time of day-specific resistance training on
adaptations in skeletal muscle hypertrophy and muscle strength: A systematic review and meta-
analysis, Chronobiology International, DOI: 10.1080/07420528.2019.1567524

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/07420528.2019.1567524

Published online: 31 Jan 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 15

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=icbi20
CHRONOBIOLOGY INTERNATIONAL
https://doi.org/10.1080/07420528.2019.1567524

The effects of time of day-specific resistance training on adaptations in skeletal

muscle hypertrophy and muscle strength: A systematic review and
meta-analysis
Jozo Grgica, Bruno Lazinicab, Alessandro Garofolinia, Brad J. Schoenfeldc, Nicholas J. Sanera, and Pavle Mikulicd
a
Institute for Health and Sport (IHES), Victoria University, Melbourne, Australia; bFaculty of Education, Department of Kinesiology, J.J.
Strossmayer University, Osijek, Croatia; cDepartment of Health Sciences, Lehman College, Bronx, USA; dFaculty of Kinesiology, University of
Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The present paper endeavored to elucidate the topic on the effects of morning versus evening Received 21 November 2018
resistance training on muscle strength and hypertrophy by conducting a systematic review and a meta- Revised 21 December 2018
analysis of studies that examined time of day-specific resistance training. This systematic review was Accepted 7 January 2019
performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses KEYWORDS
guidelines with searches conducted through PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus databases. Chronobiology; circadian
The Downs and Black checklist was used for the assessment of the methodological quality of the rhythm; MVC; muscle size
included studies. Studies that examined the effects of time of day-specific resistance training (while
equating all other training variables, such as training frequency and volume, between the groups) on
muscle strength and/or muscle size were included in the present review. The random effects model was
used for the meta-analysis. Meta-analyses explored (1) the differences in strength expression between
morning and evening hours at baseline; (2) the differences in strength within the groups training in the
morning and evening by using their post-intervention strength data from the morning and evening
strength assessments; (3) the overall differences between the effects of morning and evening resistance
training (with subgroup analyses conducted for studies that assessed strength in the morning hours and
for the studies that assessed strength in the evening hours). Finally, a meta-analysis was also conducted
for studies that assessed muscle hypertrophy. Eleven studies of moderate and good methodological
quality were included in the present review. The primary findings of the review are as follows: (1) at
baseline, a significant difference in strength between morning and evening is evident, with greater
strength observed in the evening hours; (2) resistance training in the morning hours may increase
strength assessed in the morning to similar levels as strength assessed in the evening; (3) training in the
evening hours, however, maintains the general difference in strength across the day, with greater
strength observed in the evening hours; (4) when comparing the effects between the groups training in
the morning versus in the evening hours, increases in strength are similar in both groups, regardless of
the time of day at which strength assessment is conducted; and (5) increases in muscle size are similar
irrespective of the time of day at which the training is performed.

Introduction Guette et al. (2005) assessed strength using

a maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) test of the
It is well established that human exercise performance
quadriceps muscle at 06:00, 10:00, 14:00, 18:00, and
varies according to the time of day (Drust et al. 2005).
22:00 h. Results showed that strength peaked at
Evidence for this variation exists across a broad range
18:00 h, with the lowest strength values obtained in
of exercise tasks. For example, research shows an
the morning sessions (i.e. 06:00 and 10:00 h). Martin
improvement in 16 km cycling time – trial perfor-
et al. (1999) compared strength values at 07:00 and
mance by approximately 50 seconds, when training is
18:00 h, and reported that MVC force was higher
carried out at 17:30 h as compared to 07:30 h
(+9%) in the evening than in the morning. Based on
(Atkinson et al. 2005). The time of day at which the
the results of these studies, it seems that time of day at
performance peaks is termed the acrophase. The acro-
which the exercise session is conducted (i.e. temporal
phase for muscle strength – defined as the ability to
specificity of training) is an important variable for
produce force against an external load or resistance –
resistance training prescription. However, current
seems to occur in the evening hours (around 18:00 h).

CONTACT Jozo Grgic jozo.grgic@live.vu.edu.au Institute for Health and Sport (IHES), Victoria University, Melbourne, Australia
© 2019 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 J. GRGIC ET AL.
resistance training recommendations, such as those
provided by the American College of Sports
Medicine (2009), do not offer any guidelines regarding
resistance training at different times of the day.
Given that strength levels appear to peak in the
evening (Guette et al. 2005), it can be hypothesized
that long-term training at a specific time of day
may have a profound effect on hallmark adapta-
tions to resistance training such as muscle hyper-
trophy and muscle strength. In support of this
hypothesis, Sedliak et al. (2009) compared the
effects of 10 weeks of training in the morning
hours (07:00–09:00 h) versus in the evening
hours (17:00–19:00 h). Following the training
intervention, only the group training in the eve-
ning hours experienced significant increases in
MVC strength. However, there appears to be no
consensus on this topic given that Souissi et al.
(2002) reported similar increases in muscle
strength both in the morning and in the evening
training groups.
In addition to strength, resistance training also
has beneficial effects on muscle hypertrophy.
Conflicting findings on the temporal specificity
of resistance training for muscle hypertrophy
have previously been reported. For example,
Sedliak et al. (2009) compared 10 weeks of morn-
ing versus evening training and observed similar
results for muscle hypertrophy of the quadriceps
regardless of the time of day at which the training
was performed. These results are in contrast to
those of Küüsmaa et al. (2016) who reported
greater hypertrophy in the groups training in the
evening hours.
Given the overall lack of consensus on the
effects of temporal specificity of resistance train-
ing, the present paper endeavored to elucidate this
topic by conducting a systematic review and
a meta-analysis of studies that examined time
of day-specific resistance training and its effects
on muscle strength and hypertrophy.
Materials and methods
Search strategy
This systematic review was performed in accordance
with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic
Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (Moher et al.
2009). English-language literature searches of
PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus
databases were conducted on 13 November 2018.
Searches were performed using the following search
syntax: (“time-of-day” OR “time of day” OR “diurnal
fluctuations” OR “diurnal variation” OR “circadian
variation” OR “circadian rhythms”) AND (“MVC”
OR “maximal voluntary contraction” OR “isoki-
netic” OR “1RM” OR “strength” OR “one repetition
maximum” OR “hypertrophy” OR “muscle size” OR
“resistance training” OR “strength training” OR
“resistance exercise” OR “strength exercise”). As
a part of a secondary search, the reference lists of
the included studies were examined as well as the
studies that cited the included studies (through the
Scopus database). The study selection was carried
out independently by two authors (JG and BL) to
minimize potential selection bias.
Inclusion criteria
All studies included in the analyses met the fol-
lowing inclusion criteria: (1) published in
English; (2) compared the effects of morning
versus evening resistance training with both
groups performing the same training routine;
(3) muscle hypertrophy and/or muscle strength
were assessed pre- and post-intervention; for
muscle hypertrophy both lean body mass
changes and changes at the muscle level (whole
muscle or muscle fiber) were considered, while
for muscle strength, tests with a repetition max-
imum (RM) component (e.g. 1RM, 5RM), or
MVC tests were considered; (4) the training
intervention lasted a minimum of 4 weeks; and
(5) the participants were apparently healthy
human participants. Only the studies that exam-
ined the effects of time of day-specific resistance
training while equating all other training vari-
ables (e.g. training frequency, volume) between
the groups were included in the present review.
Data extraction
Two authors (JG and AG) independently extracted
the following data from the included studies: (1)
study authors; (2) the participants’ characteristics;
(3) the employed questionnaire for the chronotype
assessment of the participants (if at all used); (4)

characteristics of the resistance training programs;
(5) muscle strength test(s) employed and the time
of day at which the strength testing sessions were
conducted; (6) details regarding the muscle hyper-
trophy assessment; and (7) pre- and post-
intervention mean ± SD values for the strength
and hypertrophy data. If the studies presented
standard errors (SEs), they
pffiffiffiwere converted to SDs
using the formula (SE
n). All data were tabu-
lated in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet designed for
this review. When raw data were not available, the
Web Plot Digitizer software, version 3.11 (Texas,
TX, USA: Ankit Rohatgi, 2017) was used to extract
data from figures. Coding sheets were checked
between the authors for accuracy.
Methodological quality
The Downs and Black (1998) 27-item checklist was
used for the assessment of methodological quality of
the included studies. In this checklist, items 1–10 are
related to reporting, items 11–13 are related to exter-
nal validity, items 14–26 are related to internal valid-
ity, and item 27 is related to statistical power. We also
added two items to the checklist that refer to the
“adherence to the training programs” (item 28) and
“supervision of the training programs” (item 29) as
per Grgic et al. (2018). Studies that scored 20–29
points were classified as being of “good quality;” stu-
dies that scored 11–20 points were classified as being
of “moderate quality;” and studies that scored <11
points were classified as being of “poor quality.” The
quality assessment of the studies was performed by
two authors (JG and AG) with discussions and agree-
ment to resolve any observed differences.
Statistical analyses
In the first part of the analysis, the morning and
evening groups were analyzed separately with the
standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% con-
fidence intervals (CIs) calculated based on the mean
± SD values for different strength assessments. The
following aspects were explored: (1) for the studies
that tested MVC strength in the morning and eve-
ning hours, we examined if there were baseline dif-
ferences in strength levels within each group
between testing sessions (i.e. morning and evening);
CHRONOBIOLOGY INTERNATIONAL 3
(2) to explore if regular morning training may
increase morning performance in a manner so that
the strength levels become similar to those generally
observed in the evening (Chtourou and Souissi
2012), we conducted an analysis only focusing on
the groups training in the morning while comparing
their post-intervention morning and post-
intervention evening strength assessment data; and
(3) to explore if training in the evening hours main-
tains diurnal variation in strength between morning
and evening hours, an additional analysis was con-
ducted that only focused on the groups training in
the evening hours by comparing their post-
intervention morning and post-intervention evening
strength data.
In the second part of the analysis, the morning
and evening resistance training groups were com-
pared whereby the SMDs and 95% CIs were cal-
culated as the difference between post- and pretest
scores, divided by the pooled pre- and posttest SD.
If a study presented multiple data points, such as
the assessment of strength in the morning and
evening hours, the SMDs and variances were cal-
culated separately and the average values were
used for the main analysis. However, to explore
the specificity of the timing at which the testing
sessions were conducted, additional subgroup ana-
lyses were performed for (1) studies that assessed
strength only in the morning hours; and (2) stu-
dies that assessed strength in the evening hours.
A meta-analysis was also conducted for studies
that assessed muscle hypertrophy. In this analysis,
both lean body mass values and data from the
assessment of hypertrophy at the whole muscle
level were combined.
The SMD magnitude was based on the follow-
ing classification: small (<0.2); medium (0.2–0.5);
large (0.5–0.8); and very large (> 0.8) effects. The I²
statistic was used to assess heterogeneity with
values ≤ 50% considered as low levels of heteroge-
neity; 50–75% considered as moderate levels of
heterogeneity; and > 75% considered as high levels
of heterogeneity. Given that there were less than
10 included studies in all analyses, publication bias
could not be explored. The statistical significance
threshold was set at p < 0.05. All analyses were
performed using the random effects model in the
Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software, version 2
(Biostat Inc., Englewood, NJ, USA).
4 J. GRGIC ET AL.
Results
Search results
The flow diagram of the search process is presented in
Figure 1. Of the initial 3,275 search results, 21 full-text
papers were read and 11 studies were included
(Chtourou et al. 2012; Krčmárová et al. 2018;
Küüsmaa et al. 2016; Küüsmaa-Schildt et al. 2017;
Sedliak et al. 2007, 2008, 2009, 2018; Souissi et al.
2002, 2012; Zbidi et al. 2016). The secondary searches
produced an additional 684 search results; however,
none of these studies were deemed eligible for analysis.
Study characteristics
The total number of participants across the included
studies was 221 (average sample per study = 22). The
details regarding the participants’ characteristics can
be found in Table 1. The average duration of the
training interventions amounted to 11 weeks, with
Figure 1. Flow diagram of the search process.
a range of 6–24 weeks. In one instance, the muscle
strength and muscle hypertrophy values were
reported in two separate papers (Kuusma et al.
2016; Küüsmaa-Schildt et al. 2017), even though
they were collected in the same group of participants.
Muscle strength was assessed in all of the included
studies, while hypertrophy was assessed in six studies
(Table 1). The studies that assessed hypertrophy used
bioelectrical impedance analysis, B-mode ultrasound,
or magnetic resonance imaging. One study also
assessed changes at the muscle fiber level (Sedliak
et al. 2018). Eight studies employed a chronotype
assessment of the participants using the
Morningness–Eveningness Questionnaire (Horne
and Ostberg 1976), Munich Chronotype
Questionnaire (Roenneberg et al. 2003), or
Circadian Type Questionnaire (Folkard et al. 1979).
In general, studies reported that the majority of the
participants did not belong to the extreme morning
or evening chronotype (Table 1).
Table 1. Summary of the included studies.
Training
duration;
Time of training Strength test
Study Sample training Chronotype assessment frequency Exercise program Strength test time of day Hypertrophy
Chtourou et al. (2012) 21 untrained Morning: Morningness–Eveningness Questionnaire (10 participants 12 weeks; 3 3–4 sets of 10 Knee extensor Morning and Not
young men 07:00–08:00 were classified as the “moderately morning type,” while 21 times per repetitions MVC evening assessed
Evening: participants were classified as “neither type”)a week testing
17:00–18:00
Krčmárová et al. (2018) 20 untrained Morning: Not assessed 12 weeks; 2 3 sets of 10–12 Leg press and Specific to the BIA
older women 07:30 times per repetitions seated row time of
Evening: week 6RM training
18:00
Küüsmaa et al. (2016) 42 untrained Morning: Munich chronotype questionnaire (none of the participants 24 weeks; 2–5 sets of 3–20 Leg press 1RM Morning and Quadriceps
and Küüsmaa-Schildt young men 06:30–10:00 were the extreme morning or evening chronotype) 2–3 times per repetitions and knee evening CSA
et al. (2017) Evening: week extension MVC testing
16:30–20:00
Sedliak et al. (2007) 27 untrained Morning: Circadian Type Questionnaire (8 and 6 participants were one 10 weeks; 3 2–4 sets of 3–15 Knee extension 7:00, 12:00, Not
young men 07:00–09:00 of the extreme types in the morning group and evening times per repetitions MVC 17:00, and assessed
Evening: group, respectively) week 20:30 on
17:00–19:00 2 days
Sedliak et al. (2008) 27 untrained Morning: Circadian Type Questionnaire 10 weeks; 3 2–4 sets of 3–15 Knee extension Morning and Not
young men 07:00–09:00 times per repetitions MVC evening assessed
Evening: week testing
17:00–19:00
Sedliak et al. (2009) 16 untrained Morning: Not assessed 10 weeks; 2–4 sets of 3–15 Squat 1RM and Non-training Quadriceps
young men 07:00–09:00 2–3 times per repetitions knee extension specific testing CSA
Evening: week MVC time
17:00–19:00
Sedliak et al. (2018) 18 untrained Morning: Morningness–Eveningness Questionnaire (all participants were 11 weeks; 2 3 sets of 8–15 Knee extension Specific to the Quadriceps
young men 07:30–08:30 the “neither type”) times per repetitions MVC time of CSA and
Evening: week training fiber CSA
16:00–17:00
Souissi et al. (2002) 14 young Morning: Morningness–Eveningness Questionnaire (participants were 6 weeks; 2 3–8 sets of 3–6 Knee extension Morning and Not
untrained 07:00–08:00 classified as the “moderately morning type” or as “neither times per repetitions MVC evening assessed
men Evening: type”) week testing
17:00–18:00
Souissi et al. (2012) 16 young Morning: Not assessed 6 weeks; 2 2 sets of 10 Knee extension Morning and BIA
untrained 07:00–08:00 times per repetitions MVC evening
boys Evening: week testing
17:00–18:00
Zbidi et al. (2016) 20 young Morning: Morningness–Eveningness Questionnaire (6 participants were 6 weeks; 3 6 sets of 8 Elbow Morning and Not
untrained 07:00–08:00 classified as the “moderately morning type,” while 14 times per repetitions extension and evening assessed
men Evening: participants were classified as “neither type”) week elbow flexion testing
CHRONOBIOLOGY INTERNATIONAL

17:00–18:00 MVC
a
Classification is presented for all participants including the control group.
BIA: bio-electrical impedance analysis; MVC: maximal voluntary contraction; CSA: cross-sectional area; 1RM: one repetition maximum.
5
6 J. GRGIC ET AL.

Methodological quality

Power, compliance, supervision (items

Total score

19 – M
19 – M
17 – M
17 – M
17 – M
18 – M
21 – G

21 – G
21 – G
20 – G
Based on the Downs and Black (1998) checklist,
the included studies were classified as being of
good (four studies) or moderate quality (seven

27, 28, 29)

studies). The average score on the checklist was

29

0a
0a

0a

0a
1
1
1

1
1

1
19 (range 17–21). Only one study got a point on
item 28 (reporting of training adherence), while

28
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
four studies did not get a point on item 29 (report-
ing the supervision of the training programs). The

27
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
methodological quality ratings for all studies can

26
be found in Table 2.

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
25
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
24
0a
0a
0a
0a
0a
0a
0a
0a
0a
0a
Results of the meta-analysis

Internal validity (items 14–26)

23

0a
1
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
22
MVC strength

0a
0a
0a
0a
0a
0a
0a
0a
0a
1
21

0a
0a
0a
0a
0a
1
1

1
1
1
Baseline differences in strength between morning

20
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
and evening

19
0a
0a

0a
0a
0a
0a
0a
0a
0a
1
The analysis focusing on baseline differences in

18
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
strength between morning and evening assess-

17
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
ments included seven studies and a total of 16 Table 2. Results of the methodological quality assessment using the modified Downs and Black checklist.

16
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
groups (Chtourou et al. 2012; Küüsmaa-Schildt

13 14 15
1 0 0a
1 0 0a
1 0 0a
1 0 0a
1 0 0a
1 0 0a
1 0 0a
1 0 0a
1 0 0a
1 0 0a
et al. 2017; Sedliak et al. 2007, 2008; Souissi et al.
2002, 2012; Zbidi et al. 2016). The results indicated
(items 11–13)

a significant difference between the conditions

External
validity

12

(p < 0.001), with the SMD favoring evening

0a
0a
0a
0a
0a
0
1

0
0
0
strength assessment (SMD = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.20,
10 11

0 0a
0 0a
0 0a
0 0a
0 0a
0 1
0 1

1 1
0 1
1 1
0.51; I² = 0%).
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
9

The effects of training in the morning

0
0
0
0

1
0
0
0

1
0
8
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Küüsmaa et al. (2016) and Küüsmaa-Schildt et al. (2017) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

The analysis comparing post-intervention strength

assessment in the evening and morning hours
1: criteria met; 0: criteria not met; G: good quality; M: moderate quality.
from the groups training in the morning included
seven studies and a total of eight groups
(Chtourou et al. 2012; Küüsmaa-Schildt et al.
2017; Sedliak et al. 2007, 2008; Souissi et al. 2002,
Reporting (items 1–10)

2012; Zbidi et al. 2016). The results indicated no

significant difference between the strength testing
Item was unable to be determined, scored 0

conditions (p = 0.664; SMD = 0.05, 95%

CI = −0.17, 0.27; I² = 0%).

The effects of training in the evening

The analysis comparing post-intervention strength
Krčmárová et al. (2018)

assessment in the evening and morning hours

Chtourou et al. (2012)

Sedliak et al. (2007)

Sedliak et al. (2008)
Sedliak et al. (2009)
Sedliak et al. (2018)
Souissi et al. (2002)
Souissi et al. (2012)

from the groups training in the evening included

Zbidi et al. (2016)

seven studies and a total of eight groups

(Chtourou et al. 2012; Küüsmaa-Schildt et al.
Study

2017; Sedliak et al. 2007, 2008; Souissi et al. 2002,

2012; Zbidi et al. 2016). The results indicated
a
 CHRONOBIOLOGY INTERNATIONAL 7

a significant difference between the conditions
(p < 0.001), with the SMD favoring evening
strength assessment (SMD = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.15,
0.62; I² = 1%).
The effectiveness of training in the morning versus
evening hours
Out of the 11 included studies, 2 did not assess MVC
strength (Krčmárová et al. 2018; Küüsmaa et al.
2016); therefore, 9 studies were included in the
main meta-analysis for MVC strength with a total
of 20 groups (Chtourou et al. 2012; Küüsmaa-Schildt
et al. 2017; Sedliak et al. 2007, 2008, 2009, 2018;
Souissi et al. 2002, 2012; Zbidi et al. 2016). The
main results of the meta-analysis indicated no sig-
nificant difference between morning and evening
resistance training on strength when the average
values of both morning and evening strength assess-
ments were employed for the analysis (p = 0.801;
SMD = 0.04, 95% CI = −0.24, 0.32; I² = 0%).
The subgroup analyses for studies that tested
strength either in the morning or in the evening
hours included seven studies with a total of 14
groups (Chtourou et al. 2012; Sedliak et al. 2007,
2008; Souissi et al. 2002, 2012; Zbidi et al. 2016).
These analyses indicated no significant difference
between the groups training in the morning and
evening when strength was tested in the morning
(p = 0.643; SMD = −0.08, 95% CI = −0.40, 0.25;
I² = 1%; Figure 2) or even when strength was tested
in the evening hours (p = 0.220; SMD = 0.19, 95%
CI = −0.11, 0.50; I² = 0%; Figure 3).
RM strength
There was an insufficient number of studies that used
RM strength tests, as only two studies examined the
1RM test and one study used the 6RM test. Therefore,
no analysis of RM strength tests was conducted.

Figure 2. Forest plot of the differences between the effects of morning and evening resistance training on maximal voluntary
contraction strength when considering only the morning strength tests. The x-axis denotes Cohen’s d (standardized mean
differences: std diff in means). The whiskers denote the 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Figure 3. Forest plot of the differences between the effects of morning and evening resistance training on maximal voluntary
contraction strength when considering only the evening strength tests. The x-axis denotes Cohen’s d (standardized mean
differences: std diff in means). The whiskers denote the 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
8 J. GRGIC ET AL.
Hypertrophy
Five studies with a total of 10 groups were
included in the final analysis for muscle hypertro-
phy (Krčmárová et al. 2018; Küüsmaa et al. 2016;
Sedliak et al. 2009, 2018; Souissi et al. 2012). The
results of the meta-analysis indicated no signifi-
cant difference between morning and evening
resistance training groups (p = 0.958;
SMD = 0.20, 95% CI: −0.40, 0.40; I² = 0%).
There was an insufficient number of studies that
have examined muscle fiber hypertrophy (only one
study examined this outcome), so no analysis of
muscle fiber hypertrophy was conducted.
Discussion
This review aimed to compare the effects of the tem-
poral specificity of resistance training on muscle
strength and hypertrophy. The primary findings of
the review are as follows: (1) at baseline, a significant
difference in strength between morning and evening
is evident, with greater strength observed in the eve-
ning hours; (2) resistance training in the morning
hours may increase strength assessed in the morning
to similar levels as strength assessed in the evening; (3)
training in the evening hours, however, maintains the
general difference in strength across the day, with
greater strength observed in the evening hours; (4)
when comparing the effects between the groups train-
ing in the morning versus in the evening hours,
increases in strength are similar in both groups,
regardless of the time of day at which strength assess-
ment is conducted; and (5) increases in muscle size
are similar irrespective of the time of day at which the
training is performed.
Muscle strength
For the baseline data, our results support those from
Guette et al. (2005) and Martin et al. (1999), who
observed that strength values are generally lower in
the morning hours and peak in the evening hours. As
such, these results add to the body of evidence show-
ing the time of day effect on strength. The differences
in strength observed in the morning hours compared
to the evening hours may be explained by factors such
as variations in body temperature and endocrine
function. Specifically, body temperature tends to be
higher in the evening hours, and higher body tem-
perature may impact muscle force production by
increasing the conduction velocity of the action
potential (see the review by Chtourou and Souissi
2012). Likewise, a variety of hormone profiles, includ-
ing testosterone and cortisol, fluctuate rhythmically
throughout the day and may impact a number of
aspects of physical performance (Teo et al. 2011).
A more interesting finding of this review, how-
ever, is that the groups training in the morning hours
had, in the post-intervention strength assessment,
similar strength values in morning and evening
strength testing sessions. These results highlight
that training in the morning may increase strength
expression in these hours so that it becomes similar
to that of the evening hours, thereby adding to the
importance of training specificity for strength (Sale
and MacDougall 1981). This may suggest a possible
adaptation or “entrainment” effect of the body clock
to the prescribed training schedule (Schroder and
Esser 2013). When analyzing the groups training in
the evening hours, the differences in strength values
between morning and evening hours are maintained
in the post-intervention assessment whereby greater
strength levels occur in the evening hours.
In the analysis in which we compared the effective-
ness of training in the morning versus in the evening
hours, our results indicate that similar gains in
strength might be expected regardless of the time
of day at which the training is conducted. These
results were comparable even in the subgroup ana-
lyses based on the time of day at which the strength
testing sessions were conducted (i.e. morning or eve-
ning hours). Based on the data presented in the ana-
lyses that focused on the individual groups (i.e. groups
training either in the morning or in the evening), it
could be expected that greater improvements in
strength would be observed in the groups training in
the morning if the testing is also conducted in the
morning hours and vice versa for the evening training
groups. While training in the morning and evening
might have a greater effect on strength when assessed
in the same period of the day, it also improves
strength when it is assessed in a non-training specific
time of day. For example, training in the evening
improves strength tested in the evening, but also in
the morning (albeit, to a lesser extent). Such results
were observed by Souissi et al. (2002), who reported
that strength improved in both the morning and the

evening training groups; however, in the morning
training group, the absolute increases in strength
were higher when tested in the morning (+26%)
than when tested in the evening (+19%). By contrast,
in the evening training group, the absolute increases
in strength were observed to be greater in the evening
(+22%) than in the morning testing sessions (+17%)
(Souissi et al. 2002). Indeed, even the pooled SMD
values showed slight favoring of the groups training in
the morning when only morning testing time was
considered (Figure 2), as well as favoring of the groups
training in the evening hours when only evening
testing time was considered (Figure 3). However,
overall there were no significant between-group dif-
ferences in either of these analyses.
It should be stressed that our findings are spe-
cific only to MVC tests and not to tests such as the
1RM test. Any generalizability of these findings to
1RM tests is limited given that MVC tests and the
1RM test may not always produce similar results,
and in some cases, may even be conflicting (Gentil
et al. 2017). Future studies exploring this topic and
using 1RM tests are warranted. Also, future studies
using MVC tests are needed given the overall small
number of included studies.
Muscle hypertrophy
In several studies, acute increase in the p70 riboso-
mal S6 kinase (p70S6K) signaling pathway following
resistance exercise was found to be highly correlated
with long-term increases in muscle size following
resistance training (Mayhew et al. 2011; Terzis et al.
2008). This high correlation may be relevant given
the findings by Sedliak et al. (2013) that the phos-
phorylation of p70S6K is similar after resistance
exercise performed in the morning and in the eve-
ning hours. Indeed, the analysis for muscle hyper-
trophy indicated that similar effects for this outcome
might be expected regardless of the time of day at
which the training sessions were conducted. These
results may be explained by the comparable effects of
both morning and evening training conditions on
post-exercise anabolic signaling (Sedliak et al. 2013).
Our findings support the acute temporal data,
indicating that similar hypertrophic adaptations
are observed over time regardless of the time
of day during which the training is performed.
Thus, we conclude that individuals interested in
CHRONOBIOLOGY INTERNATIONAL 9
inducing muscle hypertrophy may choose the time
of day to train based on a personal preference.
That said, a degree of caution is warranted when
extrapolating these results into practice given that
they are based on only five studies. Also, the
changes in muscle size observed at the whole
muscle level might not be fully comparable to
those observed at the muscle fiber level (Grgic
and Schoenfeld 2018). Out of the 11 included
studies, only 1 study (Sedliak et al. 2018) examined
muscle fiber cross-sectional area (CSA). The
results of this study suggested similar increases in
muscle fiber CSA in both the group training in the
morning (+21%) and the group training in the
evening hours (+18%). However, given the paucity
of data on the topic, examining changes in muscle
size in general, and the changes at the muscle fiber
level in particular, future research is needed to
draw more definitive inferences.
Practical applications
From a public health perspective, the results pre-
sented herein highlight that similar effects on
increases in muscle strength and muscle size may
be produced by training in the morning and in the
evening. Therefore, individuals interested in partici-
pating in resistance exercise should choose the time
of the day for training that will ultimately facilitate
long-term training adherence. For sports coaches
and trainers, it is interesting to note that after
a period of training in the morning hours, strength
levels in these hours appear to become similar to
those observed in the evening. However, when train-
ing in the evening hours, the general difference in
strength between morning and evening hours does
not change. These findings may be of considerable
value from a practical standpoint as they highlight
that if the specific time of competition for an athlete
is known in advance, at least some of the training
sessions should be organized so that they coincide
with the competition time of day (to ensure
a positive time-specific performance).
Methodological quality
Overall, the included studies were classified as
being of good or moderate methodological quality.
However, only one study reported the participants’
10 J. GRGIC ET AL.
compliance with the training programs, with all
the participants attending at least 90% of the train-
ing sessions (Küüsmaa et al. 2016). Given that
other included studies did not report this informa-
tion, it remains unclear if there were any differ-
ences in the adherence to training between the
groups. Also, several studies did not report if the
training programs were supervised or not (Table
2). Supervision of the training is an important
factor to consider given that supervised resistance
training programs (as compared to the training
programs that are unsupervised) generally produce
greater increases in strength (Gentil and Bottaro
2010). Future studies, therefore, should ensure that
the participants’ adherence to the training pro-
grams is reported and should also clearly state
whether the resistance training programs were
supervised.
From a study design perspective, it needs to be
highlighted that most of the included studies did
assess chronotype of the participants, and in gen-
eral, these studies report that the included partici-
pants did not belong to any extreme chronotype,
or that the distribution of these individuals was
similar between the groups (Table 1). However,
three studies (Krčmárová et al. 2018; Sedliak
et al. 2009; Souissi et al. 2012) did not assess the
chronotype of the participants which, therefore,
presents a limitation of their study design given
that (at least in aerobic exercise) maximal perfor-
mance is expressed at different times of the day
based on the individual’s chronotype (Facer-
Childs and Brandstaetter 2015). Examining the
individual responses of those with differing chron-
otypes to resistance training would provide further
insight into the potential influence of time of day
on physical performance. This should be consid-
ered imperative for future studies in this area,
given the previous findings in endurance exercise
performance and the recent focus on circadian
rhythms in physiological function (Facer-Childs
and Brandstaetter 2015). Indeed, several studies
from Jacopo Vitale’s laboratory show that chron-
otype should be considered when (1) assessing
sleep quality (Vitale et al. 2018) and (2) scheduling
high-intensity interval exercise (Bonato et al.
2017a; Vitale et al. 2017; Vitale and Weydahl
2017). The studies performed by this research
group highlight that different chronotypes may
show divergent responses to training at different
times of day in the context of both subjective (i.e.
the rating of perceived exertion) and physiological
responses (i.e. salivary cortisol) (Bonato et al.
2017b; Rossi et al. 2015). Therefore, future studies
should consider a detailed assessment of chrono-
type and habitual sleep–wake cycles so that the
comparison between the groups remains valid.
Limitations
The primary limitation of the present review is the
wide age range of the participants across the
included studies. Younger and older individuals
might not experience the same responses to resis-
tance training; for example, Roth et al. (2000)
reported that older women may exhibit higher
levels of muscle damage after resistance exercise
than their younger counterparts. Therefore, com-
bining participants from various age groups in the
same analysis might confound the pooled results.
While we did use the random effects model to
account for this age-related heterogeneity across
the samples in the individual studies (Higgins
2008), it remains unclear to what extent did the
inclusion of all these age groups in the same ana-
lysis affect the overall results.
Conclusions
In summary, the results presented herein con-
firm that, at baseline, the expression of strength
in humans is greater in the evening than in the
morning hours. After a period of consistent
training in the morning, strength levels, as
observed in the morning, appear to become simi-
lar to those observed in the evening. By contrast,
training in the evening maintains the general
differences in the strength expression across dif-
ferent times of the day. Training both in the
morning and in the evening hours may produce
similar improvements in strength regardless of
the time at which the testing sessions are con-
ducted. This is likely given that training in the
morning and in the evening hours also improves
strength when assessed in a specific and in
a non-training specific time of day. Finally,
increases in muscle hypertrophy are similar

regardless of the time of day at which the resis-
tance training is conducted.
Declaration of interest
The authors of this study declare that there is no conflict of
interest.
References
American College of Sports Medicine. 2009. American col-
lege of sports medicine position stand. Progression models
in resistance training for healthy adults. Med Sci Sports
Exerc. 41(3):687–708.
Atkinson G, Todd C, Reilly T, Waterhouse J. 2005. Diurnal
variation in cycling performance: influence of warm-up.
J Sports Sci. 23(3):321–29.
Bonato M, Agnello L, Galasso L, Montaruli A, Roveda E,
Merati G, La Torre A, Vitale JA. 2017a. Acute modification
of cardiac autonomic function of high-intensity interval train-
ing in collegiate male soccer players with different chronotype:
a cross-over study. J Sports Sci Med. 16(2):286–94.
Bonato M, La Torre A, Saresella M, Marventano I, Merati G,
Vitale JA. 2017b. Salivary cortisol concentration after
high-intensity interval exercise: time of day and chrono-
type effect. Chronobiol Int. 34(6):698–707.
Chtourou H, Chaouachi A, Driss T, Dogui M, Behm DG,
Chamari K, Souissi N. 2012. The effect of training at the
same time of day and tapering period on the diurnal
variation of short exercise performances. J Strength Cond
Res. 26(3):697–708.
Chtourou H, Souissi N. 2012. The effect of training at
a specific time of day: a review. J Strength Cond Res. 26
(7):1984–2005.
Downs SH, Black N. 1998. The feasibility of creating a checklist
for the assessment of the methodological quality both of
randomised and non-randomised studies of health care
interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 52(6):377–84.
Drust B, Waterhouse J, Atkinson G, Edwards B, Reilly T.
2005. Circadian rhythms in sports performance–an update.
Chronobiol Int. 22(1):21–44.
Facer-Childs E, Brandstaetter R. 2015. The impact of circa-
dian phenotype and time since awakening on diurnal
performance in athletes. Curr Biol. 25(4):518–22.
Folkard S, Monk TH, Lobban MC. 1979. Towards a predictive
test of adjustment to shift work. Ergonomics. 22(1):79–91.
Gentil P, Bottaro M. 2010. Influence of supervision ratio on
muscle adaptations to resistance training in nontrained
subjects. J Strength Cond Res. 24(3):639–43.
Gentil P, Del Vecchio FB, Paoli A, Schoenfeld BJ, Bottaro M.
2017. Isokinetic dynamometry and 1RM tests produce
conflicting results for assessing alterations in muscle
strength. J Hum Kinet. 56:19–27.
CHRONOBIOLOGY INTERNATIONAL 11
Grgic J, Schoenfeld BJ. 2018. Are the hypertrophic adapta-
tions to high and low-load resistance training muscle fiber
type specific? Front Physiol. 9:402.
Grgic J, Schoenfeld BJ, Skrepnik M, Davies TB, Mikulic P.
2018. Effects of rest interval duration in resistance training
on measures of muscular strength: a systematic review.
Sports Med. 48(1):137–51.
Guette M, Gondin J, Martin A. 2005. Time-of-day effect on
the torque and neuromuscular properties of dominant
and non-dominant quadriceps femoris. Chronobiol Int.
22(3):541–58.
Higgins JP. 2008. Commentary: heterogeneity in meta-analysis
should be expected and appropriately quantified.
Int J Epidemiol. 37(5):1158–60.
Horne JA, Ostberg O. 1976. A self-assessment questionnaire
to determine morningness-eveningness in human circa-
dian rhythms. Int J Chronobiol. 4:97–110.
Krčmárová B, Krčmár M, Schwarzová M, Chlebo P,
Chlebová Z, Židek R, Kolesárová A, Zbyňovská K,
Kováčiková E, Walker S. 2018. The effects of 12-week
progressive strength training on strength, functional capa-
city, metabolic biomarkers, and serum hormone concen-
trations in healthy older women: morning versus evening
training. Chronobiol Int. 35:1490–502.
Küüsmaa M, Schumann M, Sedliak M, Kraemer WJ,
Newton RU, Malinen JP, Nyman K, Häkkinen A,
Häkkinen K. 2016. Effects of morning versus evening
combined strength and endurance training on physical
performance, muscle hypertrophy, and serum hormone
concentrations. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 41(12):1285–94.
Küüsmaa-Schildt M, Eklund D, Avela J, Rytkönen T, Newton R,
Izquierdo M, Häkkinen K. 2017. Neuromuscular adaptations
to combined strength and endurance training: order and
time-of-day. Int J Sports Med. 38(9):707–16.
Martin A, Carpentier A, Guissard N, van Hoecke J,
Duchateau J. 1999. Effect of time of day on force variation
in a human muscle. Muscle Nerve. 22(10):1380–87.
Mayhew DL, Hornberger TA, Lincoln HC, Bamman MM.
2011. Eukaryotic initiation factor 2B epsilon induces
cap-dependent translation and skeletal muscle
hypertrophy. J Physiol. 589(Pt 12):3023–37.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group PRISMA.
2009. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and
meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 6(7):
e1000097.
Roenneberg T, Wirz-Justice A, Merrow M. 2003. Life
between clocks: daily temporal patterns of human
chronotypes. J Biol Rhythms. 18(1):80–90.
Rossi A, Formenti D, Vitale JA, Calogiuri G, Weydahl A.
2015. The effect of chronotype on psychophysiological
responses during aerobic self-paced exercises. Percept
Mot Skills. 121(3):840–55.
Roth SM, Martel GF, Ivey FM, Lemmer JT, Metter EJ,
Hurley BF, Rogers MA. 2000. High-volume,
heavy-resistance strength training and muscle damage in
young and older women. J Appl Physiol. 88(3):1112–18.
12 J. GRGIC ET AL.
Sale D, MacDougall D. 1981. Specificity in strength training:
a review for the coach and athlete. Can J Appl Sport Sci. 6
(2):87–92.
Schroder EA, Esser KA. 2013. Circadian rhythms, skeletal
muscle molecular clocks, and exercise. Exerc Sport Sci
Rev. 41(4):224–29.
Sedliak M, Finni T, Cheng S, Kraemer WJ, Häkkinen K. 2007.
Effect of time-of-day-specific strength training on serum
hormone concentrations and isometric strength in men.
Chronobiol Int. 24(6):1159–77.
Sedliak M, Finni T, Cheng S, Lind M, Häkkinen K. 2009. Effect of
time-of-day-specific strength training on muscular hypertro-
phy in men. J Strength Cond Res. 23(9):2451–57.
Sedliak M, Finni T, Peltonen J, Häkkinen K. 2008. Effect of
time-of-day-specific strength training on maximum
strength and EMG activity of the leg extensors in men.
J Sports Sci. 26(10):1005–14.
Sedliak M, Zeman M, Buzgó G, Cvecka J, Hamar D, Laczo E,
Okuliarova M, Vanderka M, Kampmiller T, Häkkinen K,
et al. 2018. Morphological, molecular and hormonal adap-
tations to early morning versus afternoon resistance
training. Chronobiol Int. 35(4):450–64.
Sedliak M, Zemanb M, Buzgó G, Cvečka J, Hamar D,
Laczo E, Zelko A, Okuliarová M, Raastad T, Nilsen TS,
et al. 2013. Effects of time of day on resistance
exercise-induced anabolic signaling in skeletal muscle.
Biol Rhythm Res. 44(5):756–70.
Souissi H, Chtourou H, Chaouachi A, Dogui M, Chamari K,
Souissi N, Amri M. 2012. The effect of training at a specific
time-of-day on the diurnal variations of short-term
exercise performances in 10- to 11-year-old boys. Pediatr
Exerc Sci. 24(1):84–99.
Souissi N, Gauthier A, Sesboüé B, Larue J, Davenne D. 2002.
Effects of regular training at the same time of day on
diurnal fluctuations in muscular performance. J Sports
Sci. 20(11):929–37.
Teo W, Newton MJ, McGuigan MR. 2011. Circadian
rhythms in exercise performance: implications for hor-
monal and muscular adaptation. J Sports Sci Med. 10
(4):600–06.
Terzis G, Georgiadis G, Stratakos G, Vogiatzis I, Kavouras S,
Manta P, Mascher H, Blomstrand E. 2008. Resistance
exercise-induced increase in muscle mass correlates with
p70S6 kinase phosphorylation in human subjects. Eur
J Appl Physiol. 102(2):145–52.
Vitale JA, Banfi G, La Torre A, Bonato M. 2018. Effect of
a habitual late-evening physical task on sleep quality in
neither-type soccer players. Front Physiol. 9:1582.
Vitale JA, La Torre A, Baldassarre R, Piacentini MF,
Bonato M. 2017. Ratings of perceived exertion and
self-reported mood state in response to high intensity
interval training. A crossover study on the effect of
chronotype. Front Psychol. 8:1232.
Vitale JA, Weydahl A. 2017. Chronotype, physical activity,
and sport performance: a systematic review. Sports Med.
47(9):1859–68.
Zbidi S, Zinoubi B, Vandewalle H, Driss T. 2016. Diurnal
rhythm of muscular strength depends on temporal speci-
ficity of self-resistance training. J Strength Cond Res. 30
(3):717–24.