Heavy-, Severe-, and Extreme-, but Not Moderate-Intensity Exercise Increase V̇o 2max and Thresholds after 6 wk of Training.

INTRODUCTION: This study assessed the effect of individualized, domain-based exercise intensity prescription on changes in maximal oxygen uptake (V̇O 2max ) and submaximal thresholds. METHODS: Eighty-four young healthy participants (42 females, 42 males) were randomly assigned to six age, sex, and V̇O 2max -matched groups (14 participants each). Groups performed continuous cycling in the 1) moderate (MOD), 2) lower heavy (HVY1), and 3) upper heavy-intensity (HVY2) domain; interval cycling in the form of 4) high-intensity interval training (HIIT) in the severe-intensity domain, or 5) sprint-interval training (SIT) in the extreme-intensity domain; or no exercise for 6) control (CON). All training groups, except SIT, were work-matched. Training participants completed three sessions per week for 6 wk with physiological evaluations performed at PRE, MID, and POST intervention. RESULTS: Compared with the change in V̇O 2max (∆V̇O 2max ) in CON (0.1 ± 1.2 mL·kg -1 ·min -1 ), all training groups, except MOD (1.8 ± 2.7 mL·kg -1 ·min -1 ), demonstrated a significant increase ( P < 0.05). HIIT produced the highest increase (6.2 ± 2.8 mL·kg -1 ·min -1 ) followed by HVY2 (5.4 ± 2.3 mL·kg -1 ·min -1 ), SIT (4.7 ± 2.3 mL·kg -1 ·min -1 ), and HVY1 (3.3 ± 2.4 mL·kg -1 ·min -1 ), respectively. The ΔPO at the estimated lactate threshold ( θLT ) was similar across HVY1, HVY2, HIIT, and SIT, which were all greater than CON ( P < 0.05). The ΔV̇O 2 and ΔPO at θLT for MOD was not different from CON ( P > 0.05). HIIT produced the highest ΔPO at maximal metabolic steady state, which was greater than CON, MOD, and SIT ( P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that i) exercise intensity is a key component determining changes in V̇O 2max and submaximal thresholds and ii) exercise intensity domain-based prescription allows for a homogenous metabolic stimulus across individuals.

Evaluation of the "Step-Ramp-Step" Protocol: Accurate Aerobic Exercise Prescription with Different Steps and Ramp Slopes.

PURPOSE: To assess whether: i) a lower amplitude constant-load MOD is appropriate to determine the mean response time (MRT); ii) the method accurately corrects the dissociation in the V̇O 2 -PO relationship during ramp compared with constant-load exercise when using different ramp slopes. METHODS: Eighteen participants (7 females) performed three SRS tests including: i) step-transitions into MOD from 20 to 50 W (MOD 50 ) and 80 W (MOD 80 ); and ii) slopes of 15, 30, and 45 W·min -1 . The V̇O 2 and PO at the gas exchange threshold (GET) and the corrected respiratory compensation point (RCP CORR ) were determined. Two to three 30-min constant-load trials evaluated the V̇O 2 and PO at the maximal metabolic steady state (MMSS). RESULTS: There were no differences in V̇O 2 at GET (1.97 ± 0.36, 1.99 ± 0.36, 1.95 ± 0.30 L·min -1 ), and RCP (2.81 ± 0.57, 2.86 ± 0.59, 2.84 ± 0.59) between 15, 30, and 45 W·min -1 ramps, respectively ( P > 0.05). The MRT in seconds was not affected by the amplitude of the MOD or the slope of the ramp (range 19 ± 10 s to 23 ± 20 s; P > 0.05). The mean PO at GET was not significantly affected by the amplitude of the MOD or the slope of the ramp (range 130 ± 30 W to 137 ± 30 W; P > 0.05). The PO at RCP CORR was similar for all conditions ((range 186 ± 43 W to 193 ± 47 W; P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The SRS protocol accounts for the V̇O 2 MRT when using smaller amplitude steps, and for the V̇O 2 slow component when using different ramp slopes, allowing for accurate partitioning of the exercise intensity domains in a single test.

A Single Test Protocol to Establish the Full Spectrum of Exercise Intensity Prescription.

PURPOSE: We aimed to test the extended capabilities of the SRS protocol by validating its capacity to predict the power outputs for targeted metabolic rates (V̇O 2 ) and time-to-task failure ( Tlim ) within the heavy- and severe-intensity domain, respectively. METHODS: Fourteen young individuals completed (i) an SRS protocol from which the power outputs at GET and RCP (RCP CORR ), and the work accruable above RCP CORR , defined as W ' RAMP , were derived; (ii) one heavy-intensity bout at a power output predicted to elicit a targeted V̇O 2 equidistant from GET and RCP; and (iii) four severe-intensity trials at power outputs predicted to elicit targeted Tlim at minutes 2.5, 5, 10, and 13. These severe-intensity trials were also used to compute the constant-load-derived critical power and W ´ ( W ' CONSTANT ). RESULTS: Targeted (2.41 ± 0.52 L·min -1 ) and measured (2.43 ± 0.52 L·min -1 ) V̇O 2 at the identified heavy-intensity power output (162 ± 43 W) were not different ( P = 0.71) and substantially concordant (CCC = 0.95). Likewise, targeted and measured Tlim for the four identified severe-intensity power outputs were not different ( P > 0.05), and the aggregated coefficient of variation was 10.7% ± 8.9%. The derived power outputs at RCP CORR (192 ± 53 W) and critical power (193 ± 53 W) were not different ( P = 0.65) and highly concordant (CCC = 0.99). There were also no differences between W ' RAMP and W ' CONSTANT ( P = 0.51). CONCLUSIONS: The SRS protocol can accurately predict power outputs to elicit discrete metabolic rates and exercise durations, thus providing, with time efficiency, a high precision for the control of the metabolic stimulus during exercise.