4.3 Article

Thigh muscle activation distribution and pulmonary VO2 kinetics during moderate, heavy, and very heavy intensity cycling exercise in humans

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/ajpregu.00028.2007

关键词

oxygen uptake; slow component; T2 time; muscle use patterns

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The mechanisms underlying the oxygen uptake (Vo(2)) slow component during supra-lactate threshold (supra-LT) exercise are poorly understood. Evidence suggests that the Vo(2) Slow component may be caused by progressive muscle recruitment during exercise. We therefore examined whether leg muscle activation patterns [from the transverse relaxation time (T2) of magnetic resonance images] were associated with supra-LT Vo(2) kinetic parameters. Eleven subjects performed 6-min cycle ergometry at moderate (80% LT), heavy (70% between LT and critical power; CP), and very heavy (7% above CP) intensities with breath-by-breath pulmonary Vo(2) measurement. T2 in 10 leg muscles was evaluated at rest and after 3 and 6 min of exercise. During moderate exercise, nine muscles achieved a steady-state T2 by 3 min; only in the vastus medialis did T2 increase further after 6 min. During heavy exercise, T2 in the entire vastus group increased between minutes 3 and 6, and additional increases in T2 were seen in adductor magnus and gracilis during this period of very heavy exercise. The Vo(2) slow component increased with increasing exercise intensity (being functionally zero during moderate exercise). The distribution of T2 was more diverse as supra-LT exercise progressed: T2 variance (ms) increased from 3.6 +/- 0.2 to 6.5 +/- 1.7 between 3 and 6 min of heavy exercise and from 5.5 +/- 0.8 to 12.3 +/- 5.4 in very heavy exercise (rest = 3.1 +/- 0.6). The T2 distribution was significantly correlated with the magnitude of the Vo(2) slow component (P < 0.05). These data are consistent with the notion that the Vo(2) slow component is an expression of progressive muscle recruitment during supra-LT exercise.

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

4.3
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