Lepretre P-M, Lopes P, Koralsztein J-P, Billat V
Laboratory of Biomechanics and Exercice Physiology, Department of Sports Sciences, Insitut National des Sports et de l'Education Physique, Paris, France.
Int J Sports Med. 2008 Mar;29(3):199-205. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-965066. Epub 2007 Sep 18.
To examine the fatigue response during an exhaustive heavy exercise performed under control of oxygen uptake (SS@V.O (2)Delta50) or power output (SS@pDelta50), eleven trained male subjects performed an incremental test to determine the peak of the oxygen uptake value (V.O (2peak)) and lactate threshold and two exhaustive steady-state cycling exercises at the intermediate value between the lactate threshold and V.O (2peak) (SS@V.O (2)Delta50 and SS@pDelta50). The control of V.O (2) induced an oscillation of the power output, which lowered the average power output (276 +/- 47 vs. 315 +/- 40 W, p = 0.004) and cancelled the slow component of oxygen kinetics. However, all subjects reached maximal cardiac output (CO) and heart rate (HR) values which were sustained almost two times longer in SS@V.O (2)Delta50 compared to SS@pDelta50 (979 +/- 854 vs. 475 +/- 236 s, p = 0.046 for CO and 1050 +/- 890 vs. 513 +/- 288 s, p = 0.037 for HR). Furthermore, SS@pDelta50 elicited V.O (2peak) but not SS@V.O (2)Delta50 (4963 +/- 434 vs. 4723 +/- 460 mL . min (-1), p = 0.026). Finally, the time spent at the maximal CO and HR values is correlated with time to exhaustion at V.O (2)Delta50. In conclusion, the cause of fatigue does not seem to have the same origin during exhaustive supra-lactate threshold exercise under control of V.O (2) (V.O (2)Delta50) compared to constant power output (pDelta50), while both elicit the maximal HR and CO values.
为了研究在以摄氧量(SS@V.O₂Δ50)或功率输出(SS@pΔ50)控制下进行的力竭性剧烈运动期间的疲劳反应,11名受过训练的男性受试者进行了递增测试,以确定摄氧量峰值(V.O₂peak)和乳酸阈值,并在乳酸阈值和V.O₂peak之间的中间值进行了两次力竭性稳态骑行运动(SS@V.O₂Δ50和SS@pΔ50)。对V.O₂的控制导致了功率输出的振荡,这降低了平均功率输出(276±47 vs. 315±40 W,p = 0.004)并消除了氧动力学的慢成分。然而,所有受试者均达到了最大心输出量(CO)和心率(HR)值,与SS@pΔ50相比,在SS@V.O₂Δ50中这些值维持的时间几乎长两倍(CO:979±854 vs. 475±236 s,p = 0.046;HR:1050±890 vs. 513±288 s,p = 0.037)。此外,SS@pΔ50引发了V.O₂peak,但SS@V.O₂Δ50未引发(4963±434 vs. 4723±460 mL·min⁻¹,p = 0.026)。最后,在最大CO和HR值下花费的时间与V.O₂Δ50时的力竭时间相关。总之,与恒定功率输出(pΔ50)相比,在以V.O₂(V.O₂Δ50)控制下进行的力竭性超乳酸阈值运动期间,疲劳的原因似乎并非源于同一机制,尽管两者都会引发最大HR和CO值。