Neuromuscular factors determining 5 km running performance and running economy in well-trained athletes

Nummela, Ari; Paavolainen, L.; Sharwood, Karen; Lambert, Mike; Noakes, Timothy D.; Rusko, Heikki

doi:10.1007/s00421-006-0147-3

Cited by 105 publications

(80 citation statements)

References 39 publications

(52 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In this theoretical context where the central command in the motor cortex is perceived as a sense of effort, the determinants of variable cycling exercise in our study might include the sense of effort and other sensations such as muscle pain which become more intense than is tolerable (StClair Gibson and Noakes 2004). Furthermore, from running studies it has been reported that other neuromuscular factors may also be important determinants of endurance running performance (Nummela et al 2006;Paavolainen et al 1999). Paavolainen et al (1999) have shown that a better performance in the 10 km time trial is related to higher pre-activation of the working muscles, associated with shorter contact times throughout the run.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Paavolainen et al (1999) have shown that a better performance in the 10 km time trial is related to higher pre-activation of the working muscles, associated with shorter contact times throughout the run. Recently, Nummela et al (2006) reported that the impaired performance during a 5 km time trial is associated with a decreased pre-activation of lower limb muscles (from EMG measurements during the 100 ms before ground contact) and higher total ground contact times. Based on the interpretations of this recent study, we hypothesize that the fact to keep the level of muscular recruitment at a high level (i.e.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because of the lack of specific analysis of muscular parameters during the pedalling and running tasks, the hypothesis of muscle recruitment and/or central recruitment of muscle function (e.g. Nummela et al 2006) during the cycle-run combination performed at various cycling intensities needs to be validated in future research. In conclusion, this study indicates that the selection of a constant PO during cycling improves subsequent running performance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Constant versus variable-intensity during cycling: effects on subsequent running performance

Berthet

Vercruyssen²,

Mazure³

et al. 2006

Eur J Appl Physiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to investigate the metabolic responses to variable versus constantintensity (CI) during 20-km cycling on subsequent 5-km running performance. Ten triathletes, not only completed one incremental cycling test to determine maximal oxygen uptake and maximal aerobic power (MAP), but also three various cycle-run (C-R) combinations conducted in outdoor conditions. During the C-R sessions, subjects performed first a 20-km cycletime trial with a freely chosen intensity (FCI, ~80% MAP) followed by a 5-km run performance. Subsequently, triathletes were required to perform in a random order, two C-R sessions including either a CI, corresponding to the mean power of FCI ride, or a variable-intensity (VI) during cycling with power changes ranging from 68 to 92% MAP, followed immediately by a 5-km run. Metabolic responses and performances were measured during the C-R sessions. Running performance was significantly improved after CI ride (1118 ± 72 s) compared to those after FCI ride (1134 ± 64 s) or VI ride (1168 ± 73 s) despite similar metabolic responses and performances reported during the three cycling bouts. Moreover, metabolic variables were not significantly different between the run sessions in our triathletes. Given the lack of significant differences in metabolic responses between the C-R sessions, the improvement in running time after FCI and CI rides compared to VI ride suggests that other mechanisms, such as changes in neuromuscular activity of peripheral skeletal muscle or muscle fatigue, probably contribute to the influence of power output variation on subsequent running performance.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Constant versus variable-intensity during cycling: effects on subsequent running performance

Berthet

Vercruyssen²,

Mazure³

et al. 2006

Eur J Appl Physiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[3][4][5][6][7] It has also been reported that in race events, mainly in the middle to long distance range, experienced athletes consciously or unconsciously regulate their "pace" strategy in order to maintain a lower metabolic cost. 8,9 However, with the evolution of racing events, it is essential to re-examine models applicable toterrain, including variations positive or negative slopes.…”

Section: ■ Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acute effect of uphill running: current scenario and future hypotheses

Filho¹,

Machado²

2018

Medical Express

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Strategies for metabolic adjustments are often considered by athletes throughout a running event. Planning for such events during training does not always include variations from level training, even though up/downhill exertion should definitely be a part of such planning. The differentiation of training stimuli, under adverse conditions of intensity and inclination, can generate differentiated benefits. However, uphill running raises expectations of deleterious effects. The imposition of different slope gradients throughout running could generate increased metabolic demands for sports performance. Thus, the present study aimed to answer questions mainly about the acute effects of uphill running, its relationship with aerobic performance, allowing us to introduce new hypotheses for future studies in the area on the subject. Gaps still need to be filled concerning the relevance of uphill running, and its determinants. Many of the points presently under scrutiny only lead to speculative explanations; for logical reasons, more studies should focus on the prescription of training at different slopes. This is the point at which specific conditioning is required, because the regulation of the effort and the energy cost resulting from the imposition of uphill running during competitive races depends heavily on previous experiences. This review will cover recently published research on the subject.

show abstract

“…RE has been evaluated using several methods [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] , almost always using oxygen uptake (V ・ O2) measured with the subject running at an intensity below the LT 14) . This is for two reasons.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relation between 1,500-m running performance and running economy during high-intensity running in well-trained distance runners

Tanji

Shirai

Tsuji

et al. 2017

JPFSM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Running economy (RE), which is evaluated at an exercise intensity below the lactate threshold (LT), is recognized as the most important physiological variable for estimating running performance. However, middle-and long-distance athletes run above LT intensity during their competitive events. This study elucidates the relation between 1,500-m running performance and physiological variables, including RE measured at intensities below and above the LT. The study included 34 male distance runners (1,500-m velocity: 22.2 ± 0.8 km·h −1 , equivalent to race times of 4′03″2 ± 8″5). RE was calculated at four running velocities selected to provide intensities of 90%LT and 95%LT below LT (REbLT) and 105%LT and 110%LT above LT (REaLT). RE was determined from aerobic energy metabolism, calculated from oxygen uptake and the respiratory exchange ratio, combined with anaerobic energy metabolism, calculated from the change in blood lactate concentration. Results show that the 1,500-m velocity was not related to maximal oxygen uptake (V ・ O 2 max) or LT intensity (r = 0.19 and 0.10, respectively). This velocity correlated with both REaLT and REbLT, with the correlation coefficient being higher for REaLT (r = −0.65 and −0.71 vs −0.56 and −0.58). Furthermore, the coefficient of determination for 1,500-m velocity determined from V ・ O 2 max, LT intensity and REaLT was higher than that determined from V ・ O 2 max, LT intensity and REbLT (R 2 = 0.603 and 0.640 vs 0.415 and 0.543). These results suggest that RE measured at an intensity above LT intensity may be better than other physiological variables for estimating 1,500-m running performance.

show abstract

Neuromuscular factors determining 5 km running performance and running economy in well-trained athletes

Cited by 105 publications

References 39 publications

Constant versus variable-intensity during cycling: effects on subsequent running performance

Constant versus variable-intensity during cycling: effects on subsequent running performance

Acute effect of uphill running: current scenario and future hypotheses

Relation between 1,500-m running performance and running economy during high-intensity running in well-trained distance runners

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About