Time limit and V̇O(2) kinetics at maximal aerobic velocity: Continuous vs. intermittent swimming trials

最大有氧速度下的时间限制和V̇O(2)动力学:连续游泳试验与间歇游泳试验的比较

阅读:2

Abstract

The time sustained during exercise with oxygen uptake (V̇O(2)) reaching maximal rates (V̇O(2peak)) or near peak responses (i.e., above second ventilatory threshold [t@VT(2)) or 90% V̇O(2peak) (t@90%V̇O(2peak))] is recognized as the training pace required to enhance aerobic power and exercise tolerance in the severe domain (time-limit, t(Lim)). This study compared physiological and performance indexes during continuous and intermittent trials at maximal aerobic velocity (MAV) to analyze each exercise schedule, supporting their roles in conditioning planning. Twenty-two well-trained swimmers completed a discontinuous incremental step-test for V̇O(2peak), VT(2), and MAV assessments. Two other tests were performed in randomized order, to compare continuous (CT) vs. intermittent trials (IT(100)) at MAV until exhaustion, to determine peak oxygen uptake (Peak-V̇O(2)) and V̇O(2) kinetics (V̇O(2)K). Distance and time variables were registered to determine the t(Lim), t@VT(2), and t@90%V̇O(2peak) tests. Blood lactate concentration ([La(-)]) was analyzed, and rate of perceived exertion (RPE) was recorded. The tests were conducted using a breath-by-breath apparatus connected to a snorkel for pulmonary gas sampling, with pacing controlled by an underwater visual pacer. V̇O(2peak) (55.2 ± 5.6 ml·kg·min(-1)) was only reached in CT (100.7 ± 3.1 %V̇O(2peak)). In addition, high V̇O(2) values were reached at IT(100) (96.4 ± 4.2 %V̇O(2peak)). V̇O(2peak) was highly correlated with Peak-V̇O(2) during CT (r = 0.95, p < 0.01) and IT(100) (r = 0.91, p < 0.01). Compared with CT, the IT(100) presented significantly higher values for t(Lim) (1,013.6 ± 496.6 vs. 256.2 ± 60.3 s), distance (1,277.3 ± 638.1 vs. 315.9 ± 63.3 m), t@VT(2) (448.1 ± 211.1 vs. 144.1 ± 78.8 s), and t@90%V̇O(2peak) (321.9 ± 208.7 vs. 127.5 ± 77.1 s). V̇O(2)K time constants (IT(100): 25.9 ± 9.4 vs. CT: 26.5 ± 7.5 s) were correlated between tests (r = 0.76, p < 0.01). Between CT and IT(100), t(Lim) were not related, and RPE (8.9 ± 0.9 vs. 9.4 ± 0.8) and [La(-)] (7.8 ± 2.7 vs. 7.8 ± 2.8 mmol·l(-1)) did not differ between tests. MAV is suitable for planning swimming intensities requiring V̇O(2peak) rates, whatever the exercise schedule (continuous or intermittent). Therefore, the results suggest IT(100) as a preferable training schedule rather than the CT for aerobic capacity training since IT(100) presented a significantly higher t(Lim), t@VT(2), and t@90%V̇O(2peak) (∼757, ∼304, and ∼194 s more, respectively), without differing regards to [La(-)] and RPE. The V̇O(2)K seemed not to influence t(Lim) and times spent near V̇O(2peak) in both workout modes.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。