miun.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A Comparison between Different Methods of Estimating Anaerobic Energy Production
Mid Sweden University, Faculty of Human Sciences, Department of Health Sciences. (Nationellt vintersportcentrum)ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4433-1218
Mid Sweden University, Faculty of Human Sciences, Department of Health Sciences. (Nationellt vintersportcentrum)ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1273-6061
2018 (English)In: Frontiers in Physiology, ISSN 1664-042X, E-ISSN 1664-042X, Vol. 9, no FEB, article id 82Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Purpose: The present study aimed to compare four methods of estimating anaerobic energy production during supramaximal exercise.

Methods: Twenty-one junior cross-country skiers competing at a national and/or international level were tested on a treadmill during uphill (7°) diagonal-stride (DS) roller-skiing. After a 4-minute warm-up, a 4 × 4-min continuous submaximal protocol was performed followed by a 600-m time trial (TT). For the maximal accumulated O2 deficit (MAOD) method the V." role="presentation" style="box-sizing: border-box; display: inline; line-height: normal; word-spacing: normal; word-wrap: normal; white-space: nowrap; float: none; direction: ltr; max-width: none; max-height: none; min-width: 0px; min-height: 0px; border: 0px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; position: relative; outline: 0px !important;">V.V.O2-speed regression relationship was used to estimate the V." role="presentation" style="box-sizing: border-box; display: inline; line-height: normal; word-spacing: normal; word-wrap: normal; white-space: nowrap; float: none; direction: ltr; max-width: none; max-height: none; min-width: 0px; min-height: 0px; border: 0px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; position: relative; outline: 0px !important;">V.V.O2 demand during the TT, either including (4+Y, method 1) or excluding (4-Y, method 2) a fixed Y-intercept for baseline V." role="presentation" style="box-sizing: border-box; display: inline; line-height: normal; word-spacing: normal; word-wrap: normal; white-space: nowrap; float: none; direction: ltr; max-width: none; max-height: none; min-width: 0px; min-height: 0px; border: 0px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; position: relative; outline: 0px !important;">V.V.O2. The gross efficiency (GE) method (method 3) involved calculating metabolic rate during the TT by dividing power output by submaximal GE, which was then converted to a V." role="presentation" style="box-sizing: border-box; display: inline; line-height: normal; word-spacing: normal; word-wrap: normal; white-space: nowrap; float: none; direction: ltr; max-width: none; max-height: none; min-width: 0px; min-height: 0px; border: 0px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; position: relative; outline: 0px !important;">V.V.O2 demand. An alternative method based on submaximal energy cost (EC, method 4) was also used to estimate V." role="presentation" style="box-sizing: border-box; display: inline; line-height: normal; word-spacing: normal; word-wrap: normal; white-space: nowrap; float: none; direction: ltr; max-width: none; max-height: none; min-width: 0px; min-height: 0px; border: 0px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; position: relative; outline: 0px !important;">V.V.O2 demand during the TT.

Results: The GE/EC remained constant across the submaximal stages and the supramaximal TT was performed in 185 ± 24 s. The GE and EC methods produced identical V." role="presentation" style="box-sizing: border-box; display: inline; line-height: normal; word-spacing: normal; word-wrap: normal; white-space: nowrap; float: none; direction: ltr; max-width: none; max-height: none; min-width: 0px; min-height: 0px; border: 0px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; position: relative; outline: 0px !important;">V.V.O2 demands and O2 deficits. The V." role="presentation" style="box-sizing: border-box; display: inline; line-height: normal; word-spacing: normal; word-wrap: normal; white-space: nowrap; float: none; direction: ltr; max-width: none; max-height: none; min-width: 0px; min-height: 0px; border: 0px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; position: relative; outline: 0px !important;">V.V.O2 demand was ~3% lower for the 4+Y method compared with the 4-Y and GE/EC methods, with corresponding O2 deficits of 56 ± 10, 62 ± 10, and 63 ± 10 mL·kg−1, respectively (P < 0.05 for 4+Y vs. 4-Y and GE/EC). The mean differences between the estimated O2 deficits were −6 ± 5 mL·kg−1 (4+Y vs. 4-Y, P < 0.05), −7 ± 1 mL·kg−1 (4+Y vs. GE/EC, P < 0.05) and −1 ± 5 mL·kg−1 (4-Y vs. GE/EC), with respective typical errors of 5.3, 1.9, and 6.0%. The mean difference between the O2 deficit estimated with GE/EC based on the average of four submaximal stages compared with the last stage was 1 ± 2 mL·kg−1, with a typical error of 3.2%.

Conclusions: These findings demonstrate a disagreement in the O2 deficits estimated using current methods. In addition, the findings suggest that a valid estimate of the O2 deficit may be possible using data from only one submaximal stage in combination with the GE/EC method.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2018. Vol. 9, no FEB, article id 82
Keywords [en]
Anaerobic capacity, Cross-country skiing, Endurance exercise, Energetics, Oxygen deficit, Oxygen demand, Oxygen uptake
National Category
Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:miun:diva-32837DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2018.00082ISI: 000424478800001PubMedID: 29472871Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85041823353OAI: oai:DiVA.org:miun-32837DiVA, id: diva2:1182316
Available from: 2018-02-12 Created: 2018-02-12 Last updated: 2018-03-19Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

Andersson and McGawley 2018(1503 kB)39 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 1503 kBChecksum SHA-512
9a0dfe2393b3b2f589662621783143266d9703c5f17872504de38c6f49a476a037e5b12a4abae0b61831980d544fa15ddc243ea237e9a18e2d7c3c4b53851b17
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopushttps://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fphys.2018.00082

Authority records BETA

Andersson, ErikMcGawley, Kerry

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Andersson, ErikMcGawley, Kerry
By organisation
Department of Health Sciences
In the same journal
Frontiers in Physiology
Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 39 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 73 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf