Suppr超能文献

在 NCAA 夏季训练营中,足球线卫的最大热损失潜力较低,因为他们自身产生的空气流动较低。

Maximum heat loss potential is lower in football linemen during an NCAA summer training camp because of lower self-generated air flow.

机构信息

1Thermal Ergonomics Laboratory, School of Human Kinetics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada; 2Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Athletics, University of South Florida College of Medicine, Bayfront Medical Center, Tampa, Florida; 3Korey Stringer Institute, Department of Kinesiology, Neag School of Education, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut; and 4Exercise and Sport Science, University of Sydney, Lidcombe, New South Wales, Australia.

出版信息

J Strength Cond Res. 2014 Jun;28(6):1656-63. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000427.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the maximum potential for heat loss of football linemen (L) and non-linemen (NL) during a National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) summer training camp. It was hypothesized that heat loss potential in L would be lower than NL because of differences in self-generated air flow during position-specific activities. Fourteen NCAA division 1 football players {7 L (mass: 126 ± 6 kg; body surface area [BSA]: 2.51 ± 0.19 m(2)) and 7 NL (mass: 88 ± 13 kg; BSA: 2.09 ± 0.18 m(2))} participated over 6 days in southern Florida (Tdb: 31.2 ± 1.6 °C, T(wb): 27.0 ± 0.7 °C, Tr: 38.4 ± 2.8° C). Simultaneous on-field measurements of self-generated air velocities (v(self)) and mean skin temperatures (Tsk) were performed throughout practice, which included 4 drill categories (special teams, wind sprints, individual drills, and team drills). The resultant net potential for heat loss through convection, radiation, and evaporation (H(total)) was calculated. Values for Tsk were similar between L and NL for all drills (L: 35.4 ± 0.8 °C; NL: 35.4 ± 0.4 °C; p = 0.92). However, v(self) was greater in NL during wind sprints, individual drills, and team drills (p ≤ 0.05). Consequently H(total) was significantly greater in NL for all drills except special teams (p ≤ 0.05). The mean estimated rate of oxygen consumption needed to exceed H(total) was 8.6 ± 1.3 ml · kg(-1) · min(-1) (2.5 ± 0.4 METs) for NL but only 5.6 ± 1.4 ml · kg(-1) · min(-1) (1.6 ± 0.4 METs) for L. A lower heat loss potential occurs in L because of the more static nature of their position-related activities and not because of differences in Tsk. The practical relevance of these findings is that potential interventions that increase convective and evaporative heat loss (i.e., mechanical fans) should specifically target L, particularly while they are participating in static on-field drills and during rest intervals.

摘要

这项研究的目的是比较美式足球线卫(L)和非线卫(NL)在 NCAA 夏季训练营中的最大潜在失热能力。研究假设,由于位置相关活动中产生的自身气流的差异,L 的潜在失热能力会低于 NL。14 名 NCAA 一级足球运动员[7 名 L(体重:126 ± 6 公斤;体表面积[BSA]:2.51 ± 0.19 m(2))和 7 名 NL(体重:88 ± 13 公斤;BSA:2.09 ± 0.18 m(2))]在佛罗里达州南部参加了 6 天的训练(Tdb:31.2 ± 1.6°C,T(wb):27.0 ± 0.7°C,Tr:38.4 ± 2.8°C)。在整个训练过程中,同时进行了自身产生的空气速度(v(self))和平均皮肤温度(Tsk)的现场测量,其中包括 4 种训练类别(特勤组、短跑、个人训练和团队训练)。通过对流、辐射和蒸发(H(total))计算出潜在的净失热值。在所有训练中,L 和 NL 的 Tsk 值都相似(L:35.4 ± 0.8°C;NL:35.4 ± 0.4°C;p = 0.92)。然而,在短跑、个人训练和团队训练中,NL 的 v(self)更大(p ≤ 0.05)。因此,除了特勤组外,NL 在所有训练中 H(total)都显著更高(p ≤ 0.05)。估计需要超过 H(total)的耗氧量的平均值为 NL 8.6 ± 1.3 ml·kg(-1)·min(-1)(2.5 ± 0.4 METs),而 L 仅为 5.6 ± 1.4 ml·kg(-1)·min(-1)(1.6 ± 0.4 METs)。L 的潜在失热能力较低是因为他们的位置相关活动性质较为静态,而不是因为 Tsk 的差异。这些发现的实际意义是,增加对流和蒸发失热的潜在干预措施(即机械风扇)应特别针对 L,特别是在他们参加静态场上训练和休息期间。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验