Millet Gregoire P, Vleck V E, Bentley D J
ISSEP, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Sports Med. 2009;39(3):179-206. doi: 10.2165/00007256-200939030-00002.
The purpose of this review was to provide a synopsis of the literature concerning the physiological differences between cycling and running. By comparing physiological variables such as maximal oxygen consumption (V O(2max)), anaerobic threshold (AT), heart rate, economy or delta efficiency measured in cycling and running in triathletes, runners or cyclists, this review aims to identify the effects of exercise modality on the underlying mechanisms (ventilatory responses, blood flow, muscle oxidative capacity, peripheral innervation and neuromuscular fatigue) of adaptation. The majority of studies indicate that runners achieve a higher V O(2max) on treadmill whereas cyclists can achieve a V O(2max) value in cycle ergometry similar to that in treadmill running. Hence, V O(2max) is specific to the exercise modality. In addition, the muscles adapt specifically to a given exercise task over a period of time, resulting in an improvement in submaximal physiological variables such as the ventilatory threshold, in some cases without a change in V O(2max). However, this effect is probably larger in cycling than in running. At the same time, skill influencing motor unit recruitment patterns is an important influence on the anaerobic threshold in cycling. Furthermore, it is likely that there is more physiological training transfer from running to cycling than vice versa. In triathletes, there is generally no difference in V O(2max) measured in cycle ergometry and treadmill running. The data concerning the anaerobic threshold in cycling and running in triathletes are conflicting. This is likely to be due to a combination of actual training load and prior training history in each discipline. The mechanisms surrounding the differences in the AT together with V O(2max) in cycling and running are not largely understood but are probably due to the relative adaptation of cardiac output influencing V O(2max) and also the recruitment of muscle mass in combination with the oxidative capacity of this mass influencing the AT. Several other physiological differences between cycling and running are addressed: heart rate is different between the two activities both for maximal and submaximal intensities. The delta efficiency is higher in running. Ventilation is more impaired in cycling than in running. It has also been shown that pedalling cadence affects the metabolic responses during cycling but also during a subsequent running bout. However, the optimal cadence is still debated. Central fatigue and decrease in maximal strength are more important after prolonged exercise in running than in cycling.
本综述的目的是对有关骑行和跑步生理差异的文献进行概述。通过比较在铁人三项运动员、跑步者或骑行者中测量的骑行和跑步的生理变量,如最大摄氧量(V O₂max)、无氧阈(AT)、心率、经济性或效率变化,本综述旨在确定运动方式对潜在适应机制(通气反应、血流、肌肉氧化能力、外周神经支配和神经肌肉疲劳)的影响。大多数研究表明,跑步者在跑步机上能达到更高的V O₂max,而骑行者在功率自行车测试中能达到与跑步机跑步相似的V O₂max值。因此,V O₂max因运动方式而异。此外,肌肉在一段时间内会专门适应特定的运动任务,导致次最大生理变量(如通气阈)有所改善,在某些情况下V O₂max并无变化。然而,这种影响在骑行中可能比在跑步中更大。同时,影响运动单位募集模式的技能对骑行中的无氧阈有重要影响。此外,从跑步到骑行的生理训练转移可能比从骑行到跑步更多。在铁人三项运动员中,功率自行车测试和跑步机跑步测得的V O₂max通常没有差异。关于铁人三项运动员骑行和跑步无氧阈的数据相互矛盾。这可能是由于每个项目的实际训练负荷和既往训练史综合作用的结果。骑行和跑步中AT与V O₂max差异背后的机制在很大程度上尚未被理解,但可能是由于心输出量的相对适应影响了V O₂max,以及肌肉量的募集与该肌肉量的氧化能力共同影响了AT。还讨论了骑行和跑步之间的其他一些生理差异:两种活动在最大和次最大强度时的心率不同。跑步时的效率变化更高。骑行时的通气比跑步时更易受损。研究还表明,蹬踏频率不仅会影响骑行期间的代谢反应,还会影响随后跑步时的代谢反应。然而,最佳蹬踏频率仍存在争议。长时间运动后,跑步比骑行更易出现中枢疲劳和最大力量下降。