## 1 Introduction  
Athletes, coaches, and performance specialists commonly use various warm-up strategies to enhance muscle strength and power [1]. One such approach, the post-activation potentiation (PAP) phenomenon, has been employed for nearly two decades and involves high-intensity muscle contractions to prime the body for subsequent physical activities and competitions [2, 3]. The goal of PAP is to temporarily enhance the muscle's force-producingcapacity by engaging in a high-intensity exercise before performing an explosive movement, such as a jump or sprint [4; 5; 6; 7; 8]. However, the temporary enhancement in muscular performance (i.e., strength, power, or speed) is based on voluntary force production following high-intensity muscle contractions [9]. This has recently been termed post-activation performance enhancement (PAPE) to differentiate it from the classical PAP, which was originally defined as the increase in electrically evoked twitch force or torque following submaximal and maximal conditioning contractions [10; 11]. From a molecular perspective, the mechanisms underlying PAPE involve the phosphorylation of myosin light chains, which increases the sensitivity of actin and myosin to calcium ions (Ca\({}^{2+}\)), thus accelerating force development [2]. This molecular framework suggests that a preload stimulus could potentially improve athletic performance metrics, such as strength, power, and speed, in athletes, enhancing their overall explosive capabilities [12]. Several factors, including gender, muscle fiber type, muscle strength level, training experience, and contraction type, play a crucial role in the transient mechanism of action following a conditioning stimulus [13]. In addition to these variables, an appropriate recovery time (rest interval) is another important consideration [14]. Previous studies have shown that optimal recovery time after a conditioning stimulus is between 0 and 11 min for the best results [14; 15; 16]. A recent systematic review found that jump-based and squat-based PAPE protocols enhance jump height and sprint performance within 0-15 min and 0-10 min recovery windows, respectively, in team-sport athletes [17]. Resistance and pylemetric exercises are recommended as the most effective conditioning methods for enhancing sprinting and change of direction performance [8]. Furthermore, conditioning-related factors such as protocol duration, multiple sets, and moderate-to-high intensity loads (>85% 1 RM) are essential for optimizing PAPE outcomes. Resistance exercises may produce a stronger PAPE effect for maximal power movements, while pylemetric exercises enhance explosive movements through the stretch-shortening cycle and are particularly effective for vertical jumps [4; 18; 19; 20]. However, some research has shown that pylemetric conditioning may not enhance performance in sprint performance or horizontal-approach for track and field athletes [21; 22; 23]. These null findings may be explained in a population-specific context. [PERSON] et al. [24] further emphasized that the effectiveness of pylemetric PAPE protocols depends on the athletes' fitness levels. Positive effects of various PAPE approaches have also been observed in volleyball players, including enhancements in vertical jump [20; 25], standing long jump [26], isometric mid-thigh pull [27], and jumping power [28], which are critical for highlighting the importance of lower-extremity power, particularly jumping ability, in volleyball. Even though the aforementioned positive effects are mainly observed in trained populations, PAPE protocols also carry potential drawbacks. For instance, high-intensity activation, such as resistance training, prior to a performance can increase the risk of sports-related injuries [29]. Additionally, the equipment required for such high-intensity activation is not always readily available in competition settings [30].