Examination of Coach and Player Perceptions of Recovery and Exertion.

Kraft, JA, Laurent, ML, Green, JM, Helm, J, Roberts, C, and Holt, S. Examination of coach and player perceptions of recovery and exertion. J Strength Cond Res 34(5): 1383-1391, 2020-Monitoring training and recovery are essential for exercise programming. Athletes can validly assess training load (TL) via the session rating of perceived exertion (SRPE) technique. However, it is unclear if coaches can successfully use this model. This study compared coach and athlete perceptions of effort and recovery, and it evaluated the efficacy of perceptually based TL monitoring. Participants included 56 athletes (Women's volleyball, soccer, and basketball and Men's basketball) and their coaches (n = 4). Perceived recovery was estimated via the Perceived Recovery Status scale. Scores of TL were calculated using the Edward's heart rate (HR) method and by multiplying SRPE by duration. Coaches provided an intended SRPE (SRPE-CI) before practice. Also, SRPE was independently estimated by coaches (SRPE-CO) and athletes (SRPE-A) ∼15-20 minutes after practice. Paired t-tests and Pearson's correlations were applied to make comparisons (α ≤ 0.05). Values of SRPE-CI, SRPE-CO, SRPE-A TLs were strongly correlated with Edwards' HR-based TLs (R = 0.74, 0.73, and 0.76, respectively). However, SRPE-CI (5.5 ± 1.9) and SRPE-CO (5.0 ± 1.9) was higher than SRPE-A (4.5 ± 1.9). Coaches estimated recovery higher than athletes (7.1 ± 1.3 vs. 5.8 ± 1.6). Estimates of TL strongly correlated with Edwards' TL regardless of information source (coach or athlete) or time point (SRPE-CI TL or SRPE-CO TL). Results suggest that coaches' perceptions validly indicated TL. Coaches' perceptions provide parallel information (correlated strongly with Edwards TL) but not identical information (demonstrated by differences in SRPE) as athlete perceptions. Differences in perceived recovery indicate that coaches overestimate recovery when compared with athletes' perceptions.

Increasing dietary nitrate has no effect on cancellous bone loss or fecal microbiome in ovariectomized rats.

SCOPE: Studies suggest diets rich in fruit and vegetables reduce bone loss, although the specific compounds responsible are unknown. Substrates for endogenous nitric oxide (NO) production, including organic nitrates and dietary nitrate, may support NO production in age-related conditions, including osteoporosis. We investigated the capability of dietary nitrate to improve NO bioavailability, reduce bone turnover and loss. METHODS AND RESULTS: Six-month-old Sprague Dawley rats [30 ovariectomized (OVX) and 10 sham-operated (sham)] were randomized into three groups: (i) vehicle (water) control, (ii) low-dose nitrate (LDN, 0.1 mmol nitrate/kg bw/day), or (iii) high-dose nitrate (HDN, 1.0 mmol nitrate/kg bw/day) for three weeks. The sham received vehicle. Serum bone turnover markers; bone mass, mineral density, and quality; histomorphometric parameters; and fecal microbiome were examined. Three weeks of LDN or HDN improved NO bioavailability in a dose-dependent manner. OVX resulted in cancellous bone loss, increased bone turnover, and fecal microbiome changes. OVX increased relative abundances of Firmicutes and decreased Bacteroideceae and Alcaligenaceae. Nitrate did not affect the skeleton or fecal microbiome. CONCLUSION: These data indicate that OVX affects the fecal microbiome and that the gut microbiome is associated with bone mass. Three weeks of nitrate supplementation does not slow bone loss or alter the fecal microbiome in OVX.