Determination Of Anaerobic Capacity Research Articles

Determination of Anaerobic Capacity - Reliability and Validity of Sprint Running Tests

PURPOSE: A number of physiological diagnostics were developed. However, the timeline-related diagnostics of maximal anaerobic glycolytic capacity remain unclear. The objective of this study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of a sprint running test to assess the anaerobic capacity.METHODS: The study was divided into three parts. Sixty-one male (24±4 years, 181.0±4.3 cm; 78.5±5.9 kg) and twelve female (25±3 years, 167.0±0.6 cm, 60.4±5.7 kg) sports students participated in this study. Twenty-five subjects (13 males, 24±2 years, 181.0±0.5 cm, 78.5±5.9 kg; 12 females, 25±3 years, 167.0±0.6 cm, 60.4±5.7 kg) performed incremental step tests at running track and several linear sprints on a running track (LSRT) with different time durations (8, 10, 12, and 14 seconds)(part I) on different days. Twenty-five male subjects (24±3 years, 180.7±6.7 cm, 84.6±8.8 kg) conducted a 10 or 12 second sprint running on a non-motorized treadmill (NMT)(part II). In part III, twenty-three male subjects (24±2 years, 181.4±5.8 cm, 74.5±7.4 kg) ran a 10 second LSRT and NMT on consecutive days. Capillary blood samplings were taken before (Lac<sub>r</sub>) and after the sprint running for ten minutes at one minute intervals to find out maximal lactate concentration after exercise and to calculate the maximum lactate production rate (LPR<sub>max</sub>).RESULTS: For all parts reliability for LPR<sub>max</sub> was proven (Part I: 8 seconds: ICC: <i>r</i>=.89; 10 seconds: ICC: <i>r</i>=.82; 12 seconds: ICC: <i>r</i>=.92; 14 seconds: <i>r</i>=.84, respectively; Part II: 10 seconds: ICC: <i>r</i>=.76; 12 seconds: ICC: <i>r</i>=.79). To analyze validity for LPR<sub>max</sub>, Part III was conducted and proven valid (ICC: <i>r</i>=.96, p=.074).CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that LSRT and NMT reliably determine anaerobic capacity and can be used as a valid tool for physiological performance diagnostics.

Determination of Anaerobic Capacity - Reliability and Validity of Sprint Running Tests

PURPOSE: A number of physiological diagnostics were developed. However, the timeline-related diagnostics of maximal anaerobic glycolytic capacity remain unclear. The objective of this study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of a sprint running test to assess the anaerobic capacity.METHODS: The study was divided into three parts. Sixty-one male (24±4 years, 181.0±4.3 cm; 78.5±5.9 kg) and twelve female (25±3 years, 167.0±0.6 cm, 60.4±5.7 kg) sports students participated in this study. Twenty-five subjects (13 males, 24±2 years, 181.0±0.5 cm, 78.5±5.9 kg; 12 females, 25±3 years, 167.0±0.6 cm, 60.4±5.7 kg) performed incremental step tests at running track and several linear sprints on a running track (LSRT) with different time durations (8, 10, 12, and 14 seconds)(part I) on different days. Twenty-five male subjects (24±3 years, 180.7±6.7 cm, 84.6±8.8 kg) conducted a 10 or 12 second sprint running on a non-motorized treadmill (NMT)(part II). In part III, twenty-three male subjects (24±2 years, 181.4±5.8 cm, 74.5±7.4 kg) ran a 10 second LSRT and NMT on consecutive days. Capillary blood samplings were taken before (Lac<sub>r</sub>) and after the sprint running for ten minutes at one minute intervals to find out maximal lactate concentration after exercise and to calculate the maximum lactate production rate (LPR<sub>max</sub>).RESULTS: For all parts reliability for LPR<sub>max</sub> was proven (Part I: 8 seconds: ICC: <i>r</i>=.89; 10 seconds: ICC: <i>r</i>=.82; 12 seconds: ICC: <i>r</i>=.92; 14 seconds: <i>r</i>=.84, respectively; Part II: 10 seconds: ICC: <i>r</i>=.76; 12 seconds: ICC: <i>r</i>=.79). To analyze validity for LPR<sub>max</sub>, Part III was conducted and proven valid (ICC: <i>r</i>=.96, p=.074).CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that LSRT and NMT reliably determine anaerobic capacity and can be used as a valid tool for physiological performance diagnostics.

Determining Anaerobic Capacity Using Treadmill Ergometry

The determination of anaerobic capacity (AC) using treadmill ergometry is problematic from a methodological, as well as a technical standpoint. In this study, a procedure from Monod and Scherrer was modified to examine whether realistic magnitudes of AC could be determined using three subject groups with different levels of anaerobic training. The subject groups consisted of 10 untrained (UT), 10 aerobic-trained runners (AeT), and 10 anaerobic-trained 400-meter sprinters (AnT). In two separate test series, first the VO2max was determined and second the so-called individual anaerobic threshold (IAT) was used to determine the aerobic power for all subjects. Then all subjects completed a series of sprints with increasing speeds above the VO2max, from which the work output from each test was calculated. Through linear regression, the point of intersection of the regression line with the y-axis was defined as global AC. The results show typically higher VO2max and IAT for AeT (62.2 ml x kg(-1) x min(-1), 14.7 km x h(-1)) compared to UT (53.2 ml x kg(-1) x min(-1); 11.2 km x h(-1)) and AnT (56.7 ml x kg(-1) x min(-1); 11.8 km x h(-1)). AC was significantly higher in AnT (4.1 +/- 0.58 kJ) compared to AeT (1.8 +/- 0.65 kJ) and UT (3.2 +/- 0.68 kJ). The determined absolute values of AC are considerably lower than of comparable examinations using bicycle ergometry. One reason for such an underestimation of AC could be that the horizontal work done during exercise on a treadmill was not taken into enough consideration. Another explanation is that the magnitude of the calculated AC values shows a dependency on the duration of each sprint test. In addition, the critical velocity for all subjects was found to be higher than for IAT, which consequently leads to an underestimation of AC. Moreover, the absolute level of the AC values appears to depend on the endurance of the comparison groups. It can then be concluded that the applied procedure allows for a differentiation amongst a variously trained collective, but does not allow a correct absolute determination of the AC.

Anaerobic Capacity: A Maximal Anaerobic Running Test Versus the Maximal Accumulated Oxygen Deficit

The present investigation evaluates a maximal anaerobic running test (MART) against the maximal accumulated oxygen deficit (MAOD) for the determination of anaerobic capacity. Essentially, this involved comparing 18 male students performing two randomly assigned supramaximal runs to exhaustion on separate days. Post warm-up and 1, 3, and 6 min postexercise capillary blood samples were taken during both tests for plasma blood lactate (BLa) determination. In the MART only, blood ammonia (BNH3) concentration was measured, while capillary blood samples were additionally taken after every second sprint for BLa determination. Anaerobic capacity, measured as oxygen equivalents in the MART protocol, averaged 112.2 +/- 5.2 ml.kg-1.min-1. Oxygen deficit, representing the anaerobic capacity in the MAOD test, was an average of 74.6 +/- 7.3 ml.kg-1. There was a significant correlation between the MART and MAOD (r = .83, p < .001). BLa values obtained over time in the two tests showed no significant difference, nor was there any difference in the peak BLa recorded. Peak BNH3 concentration recorded was significantly increased from resting levels at exhaustion during the MART.