4.6 Article

Effect of biological maturation on maximal oxygen uptake and ventilatory thresholds in soccer players: An allometric approach

期刊

JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCES
卷 29, 期 10, 页码 1029-1039

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2011.570775

关键词

Soccer; children; maximal oxygen uptake; ventilatory threshold; allometry

资金

  1. Brazilian Sports Ministry
  2. CNPq (Brazilian Council of Science and Technology)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, we investigated the effect of biological maturation on maximal oxygen uptake ((V) over dotO(2max)) and ventilatory thresholds (VT1 and VT2) in 110 young soccer players separated into pubescent and post-pubescent groups.. Maximal oxygen uptake and (V) over dotO(2) corresponding to VT1 and VT2 were expressed as absolute values, ratio standards, theoretical exponents, and experimentally observed exponents. Absolute (V) over dotO(2) (ml . min(-1)) was different between groups for VT1, VT2, and (V) over dotO(2max). Ratio standards (ml . kg(-1) . min(-1)) were not significantly different between groups for VT1, VT2, and (V) over dotO(2max). Theoretical exponents (ml . kg(-0.67) . min(-1) and ml . kg(-0.75) . min(-1)) were not properly adjusted for the body mass effects on VT1, VT2, and (V) over dotO(2max). When the data were correctly adjusted using experimentally observed exponents, VT1 (ml . kg(-0.94) . min(-1)) and VT2 (ml . kg(-0.95) . min(-1)) were not different between groups. The experimentally observed exponent for (V) over dotO(2max) (ml . kg(-0.90) . min(-1)) was different between groups (P = 0.048); however, this difference could not be attributed to biological maturation. In conclusion, biological maturation had no effect on VT1, VT2 or (V) over dotO(2max) when the effect of body mass was adjusted by experimentally observed exponents. Thus, when evaluating the physiological performance of young soccer players, allometric scaling needs to be taken into account instead of using theoretical approaches.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据