TY - JOUR
T1 - Hot ambient conditions do not alter intermittent cycling sprint performance
AU - Almudehki, Fuad
AU - Girard, Olivier
AU - Grantham, Justin
AU - Racinais, Sebastien
PY - 2012/3/1
Y1 - 2012/3/1
N2 - Objectives: To investigate the effect of hot exposure on the ability to perform intermittent cycling sprints. Design: Repeated measures. Methods: Ten male volunteers performed 35min of intermittent cycling comprising of 8 maximal 6-s sprints interspersed by 1min of passive recovery followed by 4min of constant-load pedaling (1Wkg -1 of body weight) on a cycle ergometer in control (24̊C, 24%rH) and hot (40̊C, 40%rH) environments. Results: Peak power output did not decrease during the exercise and was not dependent on the environmental temperature (average of 767 ± 120. W in control and 767 ± 119. W in hot, NS). Skin temperatures (e.g., chest: 36.8 ± 0.8 vs. 32.7 ± 0.6°C), heart rate (132 ± 13 vs. 118 ± 13. bpm) and rating of perceived exertion (13 ± 3 vs. 11 ± 3) were higher (all p < .05) in hot than control environment. However, EMG activity (RMS, vastus lateralis) and neuromuscular efficiency (power/RMS ratio) were similar at the two environmental conditions. Conclusions: Despite higher cardiovascular and perceptual strain in the hot trial, heat exposure did not alter neither peak power output nor related muscle activation and neuromuscular efficiency in the absence of hyperthermia (average core temperature of 37.6 ± 0.3°C in control vs. 37.7 ± 0.4°C in hot, NS).
AB - Objectives: To investigate the effect of hot exposure on the ability to perform intermittent cycling sprints. Design: Repeated measures. Methods: Ten male volunteers performed 35min of intermittent cycling comprising of 8 maximal 6-s sprints interspersed by 1min of passive recovery followed by 4min of constant-load pedaling (1Wkg -1 of body weight) on a cycle ergometer in control (24̊C, 24%rH) and hot (40̊C, 40%rH) environments. Results: Peak power output did not decrease during the exercise and was not dependent on the environmental temperature (average of 767 ± 120. W in control and 767 ± 119. W in hot, NS). Skin temperatures (e.g., chest: 36.8 ± 0.8 vs. 32.7 ± 0.6°C), heart rate (132 ± 13 vs. 118 ± 13. bpm) and rating of perceived exertion (13 ± 3 vs. 11 ± 3) were higher (all p < .05) in hot than control environment. However, EMG activity (RMS, vastus lateralis) and neuromuscular efficiency (power/RMS ratio) were similar at the two environmental conditions. Conclusions: Despite higher cardiovascular and perceptual strain in the hot trial, heat exposure did not alter neither peak power output nor related muscle activation and neuromuscular efficiency in the absence of hyperthermia (average core temperature of 37.6 ± 0.3°C in control vs. 37.7 ± 0.4°C in hot, NS).
KW - Exercise
KW - Heat
KW - Hyperthermia
KW - Neuromuscular fatigue
KW - Temperature
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84857456035&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jsams.2011.07.009
DO - 10.1016/j.jsams.2011.07.009
M3 - Article
C2 - 21940212
AN - SCOPUS:84857456035
SN - 1440-2440
VL - 15
SP - 148
EP - 152
JO - Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
JF - Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
IS - 2
ER -