File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Physiological, biochemical, anthropometric, and biomechanical influences on exercise economy in humans

TitlePhysiological, biochemical, anthropometric, and biomechanical influences on exercise economy in humans
Authors
Keywordsskeletal muscle
locomotion
mitochondria
biomechanic
Issue Date2017
Citation
Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 2017, v. 27, n. 12, p. 1627-1637 How to Cite?
Abstract© 2017 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd Interindividual variation in running and cycling exercise economy (EE) remains unexplained although studied for more than a century. This study is the first to comprehensively evaluate the importance of biochemical, structural, physiological, anthropometric, and biomechanical influences on running and cycling EE within a single study. In 22 healthy males (VO2max range 45.5-72.1 mL·min−1·kg−1), no factor related to skeletal muscle structure (% slow-twitch fiber content, number of capillaries per fiber), mitochondrial properties (volume density, oxidative capacity, or mitochondrial efficiency), or protein content (UCP3 and MFN2 expression) explained variation in cycling and running EE among subjects. In contrast, biomechanical variables related to vertical displacement correlated well with running EE, but were not significant when taking body weight into account. Thus, running EE and body weight were correlated (R2=.94; P<.001), but was lower for cycling EE (R2=.23; P<.023). To separate biomechanical determinants of running EE, we contrasted individual running and cycling EE considering that during cycle ergometer exercise, the biomechanical influence on EE would be small because of the fixed movement pattern. Differences in cycling and running exercise protocols, for example, related to biomechanics, play however only a secondary role in determining EE. There was no evidence for an impact of structural or functional skeletal muscle variables on EE. Body weight was the main determinant of EE explaining 94% of variance in running EE, although more than 50% of the variability of cycling EE remains unexplained.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/288846
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 3.5
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.485
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLundby, C.-
dc.contributor.authorMontero, D.-
dc.contributor.authorGehrig, S.-
dc.contributor.authorAndersson Hall, U.-
dc.contributor.authorKaiser, P.-
dc.contributor.authorBoushel, R.-
dc.contributor.authorMeinild Lundby, A. K.-
dc.contributor.authorKirk, N.-
dc.contributor.authorValdivieso, P.-
dc.contributor.authorFlück, M.-
dc.contributor.authorSecher, N. H.-
dc.contributor.authorEdin, F.-
dc.contributor.authorHein, T.-
dc.contributor.authorMadsen, K.-
dc.date.accessioned2020-10-12T08:06:01Z-
dc.date.available2020-10-12T08:06:01Z-
dc.date.issued2017-
dc.identifier.citationScandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 2017, v. 27, n. 12, p. 1627-1637-
dc.identifier.issn0905-7188-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/288846-
dc.description.abstract© 2017 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd Interindividual variation in running and cycling exercise economy (EE) remains unexplained although studied for more than a century. This study is the first to comprehensively evaluate the importance of biochemical, structural, physiological, anthropometric, and biomechanical influences on running and cycling EE within a single study. In 22 healthy males (VO2max range 45.5-72.1 mL·min−1·kg−1), no factor related to skeletal muscle structure (% slow-twitch fiber content, number of capillaries per fiber), mitochondrial properties (volume density, oxidative capacity, or mitochondrial efficiency), or protein content (UCP3 and MFN2 expression) explained variation in cycling and running EE among subjects. In contrast, biomechanical variables related to vertical displacement correlated well with running EE, but were not significant when taking body weight into account. Thus, running EE and body weight were correlated (R2=.94; P<.001), but was lower for cycling EE (R2=.23; P<.023). To separate biomechanical determinants of running EE, we contrasted individual running and cycling EE considering that during cycle ergometer exercise, the biomechanical influence on EE would be small because of the fixed movement pattern. Differences in cycling and running exercise protocols, for example, related to biomechanics, play however only a secondary role in determining EE. There was no evidence for an impact of structural or functional skeletal muscle variables on EE. Body weight was the main determinant of EE explaining 94% of variance in running EE, although more than 50% of the variability of cycling EE remains unexplained.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofScandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports-
dc.subjectskeletal muscle-
dc.subjectlocomotion-
dc.subjectmitochondria-
dc.subjectbiomechanic-
dc.titlePhysiological, biochemical, anthropometric, and biomechanical influences on exercise economy in humans-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/sms.12849-
dc.identifier.pmid28164383-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85016649166-
dc.identifier.volume27-
dc.identifier.issue12-
dc.identifier.spage1627-
dc.identifier.epage1637-
dc.identifier.eissn1600-0838-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000416411800011-
dc.identifier.issnl0905-7188-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats