Sex-Based differences of Six Repeated Wingate Anaerobic Cycle Test Performances

Abstract

A recent investigation has demonstrated that an active recovery leads to a greater mean anaerobic power output when more than two Wingate Anaerobic Cycle Tests (WAnT) are performed successively. However, to date, less is known regarding the impact of sex on successive WAnT performances PURPOSE: To determine the effect of sex on six repeated WAnT performances. METHODS: Ten participants, five males (M: age = 21.60 ± 3.05 yr, ht = 1.75 ± 0.03 m, wt = 65.81 ± 5.12 kg, BMI = 21.42 ± 1.17 kg·m-2, %BF = 7.01 ± 1.91 %) and five females (F: age = 19.60 ± 0.55 yr, ht = 1.59 ± 0.04 m, wt = 64.30 ± 5.15 kg, BMI = 25.42 ± 2.65 kg·m-2, %BF = 27.61 ± 2.44 %) completed two identical lab sessions, seven to fourteen days apart. The first lab session served as familiarization, “dry run”, trial in which data was collected but not reported. During both sessions, participants were asked to warm-up by pedaling on a stationary bike for five minutes, at 50 revolutions per min (RPM) with no resistance, before performing six repeated WAnT against a resistance equal to 7.5% of their body weight. The recovery period between tests consisted of three minutes of active recovery (pedaling at 50 RPM with no resistance) and one minute of passive recovery. RESULTS: Peak and relative peak anaerobic power were significantly higher in the M group compared to the F group (M: 497.56 ± 25.63; F: 380.60 ± 17.67 W and M: 7.55 ± 0.22; F: 5.93 ± 0.25 W/kg, p<0.05) with no time effect. There was no significant difference between the M and the F groups when peak anaerobic power was expressed relative to lean body mass (M: 8.12 ± 0.20; F: 8.20 ± 0.38 W/kg, p>0.05). Mean and relative mean anaerobic power were significantly higher in the M group compared to the F group (M: 355.49 ± 17.09; F: 256.88 ± 8.40 W and M: 5.39 ± 0.11; F: 4.01 ± 0.13 W/kg, p<0.05) and a significant time effect (p<0.05) was apparent. There was no significant difference between the M and the F groups when mean anaerobic power was expressed relative to lean body mass (M: 5.80 ± 0.12; F: 5.53 ± 0.15 W/kg, p>0.05) but time effect (p<0.05) was apparent. CONCLUSION: Both the M and the F groups demonstrated similar anaerobic performance trends although the M group achieved higher peak and mean absolute and relative power performances, however, the variances seemed to be related to the differences in body composition between the M and the F groups.