The aim of this study was to compare energy cost of running and lower limb spring-mass characteristics and maximal power, between young and older highly trained runners.
Twenty highly trained male endurance runners were divided into two groups: young and master athletes. Two testing sessions were used to measure and compare (i) lower limb power during three jumping tests (squat jump (SJ), countermovement jump (CMJ), rebound jump (RJ)) as well as stiffness during the RJ test and running trials (using an OptoJump system, placed on the floor for jumping and on each side of the treadmill belt for running), and (ii) the energy cost of running and oxygen consumption (VO2) kinetics (using an Oxycon Pro breath-by-breath gas analyzer) at three speeds: 10 km.h, self-selected speed, and speed corresponding to 90% of the second ventilatory threshold (VT2).
Energy cost of running was higher in masters than in young athletes at all speeds (10 km.h: 13.0%; self-selected: 10.8%; 90% VT2: 7.7% on average). Jumping power was lower in masters (SJ: -28.0%; CMJ: -30.5%; RJ: -27.9%) and significantly correlated with energy cost at 10 km.h and at self-selected speed (10 km.h r = -0.71; -0.70; -0.47; self-selected speed: r = -0.76; -0.74; -0.58, respectively). RJ stiffness was also lower in masters (-27.8%), although stiffness during running showed no difference between groups.
A long-lasting running practice seemed to preserve the bouncing mechanism of master athletes, yet their energy cost was higher when compared to younger runners, which might have been associated with a lower muscle power.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 19 August 2016.
All research outputs
#2,494,979
of 34,410,315 outputs
Outputs from Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercise
#1,885
of 8,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,305
of 337,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercise
#22
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,315 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,590 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 337,884 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 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 69% of its contemporaries.
