| Title |
Exercise-induced trunk fatigue decreases double poling performance in well-trained cross-country skiers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Applied Physiology, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00421-018-3938-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elias Bucher, Øyvind Sandbakk, Lars Donath, Ralf Roth, Lukas Zahner, Oliver Faude |
| Abstract |
To examine the effects of exercise-induced trunk fatigue on double poling performance, physiological responses and trunk strength in cross-country skiers. Sixteen well-trained male cross-country skiers completed two identical pre- and post-performance tests, separated by either a 25-min trunk fatiguing exercise sequence or rest period in a randomized, controlled cross-over design. Performance tests consisted of a maximal trunk flexion and extension test, followed by a 3-min double poling (DP) test on a ski ergometer. Peak torque during isometric trunk flexion (- 66%, p < .001) and extension (- 7.4%, p = .03) decreased in the fatigue relative to the control condition. Mean external power output during DP decreased by 14% (p < .001) and could be attributed both to reduced work per cycle (- 9%, p = .019) and a reduced cycle rate (- 6%, p = .06). Coinciding physiological changes in peak oxygen uptake (- 6%, p < .001) and peak ventilation (- 7%, p < .001) could be observed. Skiers chose a more even-pacing strategy when fatigued, with the performance difference between fatigue and control condition being most prominent during the first 2 min of the post-test. In well-trained cross-country skiers, exercise-induced trunk fatigue led to a substantial decrease in DP performance, caused by both decreased work per cycle and cycle rate and accompanied by reduced aerobic power. Hence, improved fatigue resistance of the trunk may therefore be of importance for high-intensity DP in cross-country skiing. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Norway | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 75% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 67 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 10% |
| Researcher | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 18% |
| Unknown | 27 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 22 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 28 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 October 2022.
All research outputs
#6,446,325
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#1,653
of 4,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,621
of 340,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#27
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 340,113 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.