↓ Skip to main content

The Role of Power Fluctuations in the Preference of Diagonal vs. Double Poling Sub-Technique at Different Incline-Speed Combinations in Elite Cross-Country Skiers

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Role of Power Fluctuations in the Preference of Diagonal vs. Double Poling Sub-Technique at Different Incline-Speed Combinations in Elite Cross-Country Skiers
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, February 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2017.00094
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christine Dahl, Øyvind Sandbakk, Jørgen Danielsen, Gertjan Ettema

Abstract

In classical cross-country skiing, diagonal stride (DIA) is the major uphill sub-technique, while double poling (DP) is used on relatively flat terrain. Although, the dependence of incline and speed on the preference of either sub-technique seems clearly established, the mechanisms behind these preferences are not clear. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare kinetics and energy consumption in DP and DIA at the same submaximal workload in cross-country skiing under two different incline-speed combinations. We compared kinetics and physiological responses in DP and DIA at the same submaximal workload (≈200 W) under two different incline-speed conditions, (5%-12.5 km h(-1) vs. 12%-6.5 km h(-1)) where DP and DIA were expected to be preferred, respectively. Fifteen elite male cross-country skiers performed four separate 6.5-min roller skiing sessions on a treadmill at these two conditions using DP and DIA during which physiological variables, rate of perceived exertion (RPE) and kinetics, including power fluctuations, were recorded. At 12% incline, DIA resulted in lower physiological response (e.g., heart rate) and RPE, and higher gross efficiency than DP, whereas at 5% incline these variables favored DP (P < 0.05). The skiers' preference for sub-technique (13 preferred DIA at 12% incline; all 15 preferred DP at 5% incline) was in accordance with these results. Fluctuation in instantaneous power was lowest in the preferred sub-technique at each condition (P < 0.05). Preference for DP at 5% incline (high speed) is most likely because the speed is too high for effective ski thrust in DIA, which is reflected in high power fluctuations. The mechanism for preference of DIA at 12% incline is not indicated directly by the current data set showing only small differences in power fluctuations between DIA and DP. Apart from the low speed allowing ski thrust, we suggest that restricted ability to utilize the body's mechanical energy as well as the use of arms in DP play an important role.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 14%
Researcher 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Other 1 5%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 10 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 7 32%
Arts and Humanities 1 5%
Linguistics 1 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Physics and Astronomy 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 10 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 20 February 2018.
All research outputs
#2,351,264
of 22,955,959 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#1,273
of 13,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,969
of 310,778 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#33
of 230 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,955,959 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,712 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 310,778 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 230 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.