Maximal lipidic power in high competitive level triathletes and cyclists.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the fat-oxidation rate in triathlon and different modalities of endurance cycling. METHODS: 34 endurance athletes (15 male triathletes, 4 female triathletes, 11 road cyclists and 4 male mountain bikers) underwent a progressive cycloergometer test until exhaustion. Relative work intensity (VO(2max)), minimal lactate concentration (La(-)(min)), lactic threshold, individual lactic threshold (ILT), maximal fat-oxidation rate (Fat(max), Fat(max) zone) and minimal fat-oxidation rate (Fat(min)) were determined in each of the groups and were compared by means of one-way analysis of variance. RESULTS: No significant differences were found for Fat(max), Fat(min) or for the Fat(max) zone expressed as fat oxidation rate (g/min). Intensities -20%, -10% and -5% Fat(max) were significantly lower for mountain bikers with respect to road cyclists and female triathletes, expressed as % VO(2max). Intensities 20%, 10% and 5% Fat(max) were significantly lower for mountain bikers with respect to male triathletes and female triathletes, and for male triathletes in comparison with female triathletes, expressed as % VO(2max). Lactic threshold and La(-)(min) did not show significant differences with respect to Fat(max). Lactic threshold was found at the same VO(2max) with respect to the higher part of the Fat(max) zone, and La(-)(min) at the same VO(2max) with respect to the lower part of the Fat(max) zone. CONCLUSIONS: The VO(2max) of Fat(max) and the Fat(max) zone may explain the different endurance adaptations of the athletes according to their sporting discipline. Lactic threshold and La(-)(min) were found at different relative work intensities with respect to those of Fat(max) even though they belonged to the Fat(max) zone.

Validation of a field test to determine the maximal aerobic power in triathletes and endurance cyclists.

OBJECTIVE: To validate a field test to assess the maximal and submaximal exercise aerobic adaptation under specific conditions, for endurance modality cyclists and triathletes. METHODS: 30 male and 4 female endurance modality cyclists and triathletes, with heterogeneous performance levels, performed three incremental tests: one in the laboratory and two in the field. Assessment of the validity of the field protocol was carried out by the Student's t test, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CV) of the maximal variables (maximal aerobic speed (MAS), maximal aerobic power (MAP), maximal heart rate (HR(max)), maximal blood lactate concentration ([La(-)](max)) and maximal oxygen uptake (VO(2max))) and submaximal variables (heart rate, HR) measured in each one of the tests. The errors in measurement were calculated. The repeatability of the field tests was assessed by means of the test-retest of the two field tests, and the validity by means of the test-retest of the laboratory test with respect to the mean of the two field tests. RESULTS: No significant differences were found between the two field tests for any of the variables studied, but differences did exist for some variables between the laboratory tests with respect to the field tests (MAP, [La(-)](max), humidity (H), barometric pressure (Pb) and some characteristics of the protocols). The ICC of all the variables was high and the CV for the MAP was small. Furthermore, the measurement errors were small and therefore, assumable. CONCLUSIONS: The incremental protocol of the proposed field test turned out to be valid to assess the maximal and submaximal aerobic adaptation.

A comparative study of blood lactate analytic methods.

Three different blood lactate analytic methods were tested for precision, accuracy, linearity, and intermethod comparison: a photoenzymatic assay (PHE), and three electroenzymatic (EE) semiautomatic assays (EE1, EE2, EE3). Reference standards and duplicate capillary blood samples from the earlobe were used. Precision and accuracy of the three techniques, when measuring L-lactate standards, were good in the whole range of measurement (mean variation coefficient, VC = 1.78-3.38%; mean difference = 1.81-3.38%). Correlation between the three methods was high (r = 0.913-0.946), but all three electroenzymatic techniques systematically measured lower values as compared to the PHE tests. The differences ranged from 0.1-1.2 (5 mmol.l-1 PHE level), to 3.4-5.7 (20 mmol.l-1 PHE level). These differences were drastically reduced when a hemolyser and a glycolytic inhibitor were added to the sample prior to the assay. The measurements obtained in capillary blood by the three techniques are not equivalent. The differences are partially attributed to the fact that the PHE technique measures total blood lactate, while the EE methods only measure plasmatic-extraerythrocytic lactate. Some regression equations are presented that may be used to convert values measured by the PHE technique, to EE values and vice versa.