A comparison between different methods of estimating anaerobic energy production

14Citations
Citations of this article
36Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

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.O2-speed regression relationship was used to estimate the 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.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.O2 demand. An alternative method based on submaximal energy cost (EC, method 4) was also used to estimate 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.O2 demands and O2 deficits. The 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.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Andersson, E. P., & McGawley, K. (2018). A comparison between different methods of estimating anaerobic energy production. Frontiers in Physiology, 9(FEB). https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2018.00082

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free