Critical power (CP) and the second ventilatory threshold (VT(2)) are presumed to indicate the power corresponding to maximal lactate steady state (MLSS). The aim of this study was to investigate the use of CP and VT(2) as indicators of MLSS. Eleven male trained subjects [mean (SD) age 23 (2.9) years] performed an incremental test (25 W.min(-1)) to determine maximal oxygen uptake (.VO(2max)), maximal aerobic power (MAP) and the first and second ventilatory thresholds (VT(1) and VT(2)) associated with break points in minute ventilation (.V(E)), carbon dioxide production (.VCO(2)), .V(E)/.VCO(2) and .V(E)/.VO(2) relationships. Exhaustion tests at 90%, 95%, 100% and 110% of .VO(2max), and several 30-min constant work rates were performed in order to determine CP and MLSS, respectively. MAP and .VO(2max) values were 344 (29) W and 53.4 (3.7) ml.min(-1).kg(-1), respectively. CP [278 (22) W; 85.4 (4.8)% .VO(2max)] and VT(2) power output [286 (28) W; 85.3 (5.6)% .VO(2max)] were not significantly different (p=0.96) but were higher (p<0.05) than the MLSS work rate [239 (21) W; 74.3 (4.0)% .VO(2max)] and VT(1) power output [159 (23) W; 52.9 (6.9)% .VO(2max)]. MLSS work rate was significantly correlated (p<0.05) with those noted at VT(1) and VT(2) (r=0.74 and r=0.93, respectively). VT(2) overestimated MLSS by 10.9 (6.3)% .VO(2max), which was significantly higher than VT(1) [+21.4 (5.6)% .VO(2max); p<0.01]. CP calculated from a given range of exhaustion times does not correspond to MLSS.

No abstract

No abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the cardiorespiratory and efficiency responses between upper (T(UBE)) and lower (T(LBE)) body exercises at the same relative power outputs and with spontaneously chosen crank (SCCR) or pedal (SCPR) rates. Twelve participants performed exercise bouts set at 20, 40, 60 and 80% of maximal power (MP) separated by passive recovery periods. Oxygen uptake, ventilation, gross and work efficiencies during T(LBE) were significantly (P < 0.05) higher than during T(UBE). These results suggest that these responses were not directly related to the relative intensities. However, no significant difference was found for delta efficiency and heart rate values. During T(UBE) and T(LBE), gross efficiency increased significantly (P < of MP for T(UBE) and T(LBE) and the same SCCR and SCPR could explain these results. The present results confirm that the cardiorespiratory and efficiency responses between arm and leg exercises are not always similar, although the power output are normalized in relation to MP and add to the understanding of differences between upper and lower body.

No abstract