| Title |
Differences in morphology and force/velocity relationship between Senegalese and Italian sprinters
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Applied Physiology, November 2003
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00421-003-0989-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Abderrehmane Rahmani, Elio Locatelli, Jean-Rene Lacour |
| Abstract |
In order to investigate whether the supremacy of African sprinters is related to the leg extensor force/velocity relationship or to leg morphology, two groups of elite sprinters originating respectively from Senegal (S) and Italy (I) were compared in this respect. The groups included 13 S and 15 I male sprinters. Their mean best performances over 100 m during the preceding track and field season were 10.66 (0.3) and 10.61 (0.3) s (NS), respectively. Age, height and mass were similar in the two groups. The force/velocity relationship of the leg extensors was assessed during maximal half-squats on a guided horizontal barbell with masses of 20-140 kg added on the shoulders. Leg morphology was assessed by relating the sub-ischial length to the standing height (L/H) and by measuring the inertia in the vertical (IZ in kg.cm2), antero-posterior (IY, kg.cm2) and medio-lateral (IX, kg.m2) planes. The two groups developed non-different force and power when lifting the heaviest loads. Inversely, the lighter the load, the lower the force and power developed by S, as compared to I (P<0.001). S demonstrated greater L/H (P<0.001), and 26% lower IZ (P<0.01), 15% lower IY (P=0.09), and 14% lower IX (P=0.10). These results suggest that S and I sprinters were similar as regards the muscle abilities involved in slow maximal contractions. However, S demonstrated lower values in muscle abilities related to high-speed contractions, suggesting that S sprinters had a lower percentage of fast twitch fibres. This is likely to be compensated for by the lower level of internal work due to longer and lighter legs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| South Africa | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 74 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 19 | 24% |
| Unknown | 21 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 37 | 47% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 22 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 17 August 2012.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#3,712
of 4,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,165
of 61,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#23
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 14.6. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 61,053 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.