These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Maximal lactate steady-state independent of recovery period during intermittent protocol.
    Author: Barbosa LF, de Souza MR, Caritá RA, Caputo F, Denadai BS, Greco CC.
    Journal: J Strength Cond Res; 2011 Dec; 25(12):3385-90. PubMed ID: 22076084.
    Abstract:
    Barbosa, LF, de Souza, MR, Corrêa Caritá, RA, Caputo, F, Denadai, BS, and Greco, CC. Maximal lactate steady-state independent of recovery period during intermittent protocol. J Strength Cond Res 25(12): 3385-3390, 2011-The purpose of this study was to analyze the effect of the measurement time for blood lactate concentration ([La]) determination on [La] (maximal lactate steady state [MLSS]) and workload (MLSS during intermittent protocols [MLSSwi]) at maximal lactate steady state determined using intermittent protocols. Nineteen trained male cyclists were divided into 2 groups, for the determination of MLSSwi using passive (VO(2)max = 58.1 ± 3.5 ml·kg·min; N = 9) or active recovery (VO(2)max = 60.3 ± 9.0 ml·kg·min; N = 10). They performed the following tests, in different days, on a cycle ergometer: (a) Incremental test until exhaustion to determine (VO(2)max and (b) 30-minute intermittent constant-workload tests (7 × 4 and 1 × 2 minutes, with 2-minute recovery) to determine MLSSwi and MLSS. Each group performed the intermittent tests with passive or active recovery. The MLSSwi was defined as the highest workload at which [La] increased by no more than 1 mmol·L between minutes 10 and 30 (T1) or minutes 14 and 44 (T2) of the protocol. The MLSS (Passive-T1: 5.89 ± 1.41 vs. T2: 5.61 ± 1.78 mmol·L) and MLSSwi (Passive-T1: 294.5 ± 31.8 vs. T2: 294.7 ± 32.2 W; Active-T1: 304.6 ± 23.0 vs. T2: 300.5 ± 23.9 W) were similar for both criteria. However, MLSS was lower in T2 (4.91 ± 1.91 mmol·L) when compared with in T1 (5.62 ± 1.83 mmol·L) using active recovery. We can conclude that the MLSSwi (passive and active conditions) was unchanged whether recovery periods were considered (T1) or not (T2) for the interpretation of [La] kinetics. In contrast, MLSS was lowered when considering the active recovery periods (T2). Thus, shorter intermittent protocols (i.e., T1) to determine MLSSwi may optimize time of the aerobic capacity evaluation of well-trained cyclists.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]