Literature DB >> 15160370

Are adult physiques geometrically similar? The dangers of allometric scaling using body mass power laws.

Alan M Nevill1, Arthur D Stewart, Tim Olds, Roger Holder.   

Abstract

Human physique classification by somatotype assumes that adult humans are geometric similar to each other. However, this assumption has yet to be adequately tested in athletic and nonexercising human populations. In this study, we assessed this assumption by comparing the mass exponents associated with girth measurements taken at 13 different sites throughout the body in 478 subjects (279 athletic subjects, and 199 nonexercising controls). Corrected girths which account for subcutaneous adipose tissue at the upper arm, thigh, and calf sites, and which simulate muscle circumference, were also calculated. If subjects are geometrically similar to each other, girth exponents should be approximately proportional to M(1/3), where M is the subjects' body mass. This study confirms that human adult physiques are not geometrically similar to each other. In both athletic subjects and nonexercising controls, body circumferences/limb girths develop at a greater rate than that anticipated by geometric similarity in fleshy sites containing both muscle and fat (upper arms and legs), and less than anticipated in bony sites (head, wrists, and ankles). Interestingly, head girths appear to remain almost constant, irrespective of subjects' body size/mass. The results also suggest that thigh muscle girths of athletes and controls increase at a greater rate than that predicted by geometric similarity, proportional to body mass (M(0.439) and M(0.377), respectively). These systematic deviations from geometric similarity have serious implications for the allometric scaling of variables such as energy expenditure, oxygen uptake, anaerobic power, and thermodynamic or anthropometric studies involving individuals of differing size. Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15160370     DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.10351

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Phys Anthropol        ISSN: 0002-9483            Impact factor:   2.868


  12 in total

1.  Movement performance and body size: the relationship for different groups of tests.

Authors:  Goran Markovic; Slobodan Jaric
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2004-03-16       Impact factor: 3.078

2.  Scaling lower-limb isokinetic strength for biological maturation and body size in adolescent basketball players.

Authors:  Humberto Moreira Carvalho; Manuel Coelho-e-Silva; João Valente-dos-Santos; Rui Soles Gonçalves; Renaat Philippaerts; Robert Malina
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2011-12-03       Impact factor: 3.078

3.  Scaling of muscle power to body size: the effect of stretch-shortening cycle.

Authors:  Goran Markovic; Slobodan Jaric
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2005-07-09       Impact factor: 3.078

4.  Optimal power-to-mass ratios when predicting flat and hill-climbing time-trial cycling.

Authors:  A M Nevill; S A Jobson; R C R Davison; A E Jeukendrup
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2006-05-10       Impact factor: 3.078

Review 5.  On self-propagating methodological flaws in performance normalization for strength and power sports.

Authors:  Ognjen Arandjelović
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 11.136

6.  Scaling or normalising maximum oxygen uptake to predict 1-mile run time in boys.

Authors:  Alan Nevill; Thomas Rowland; Donna Goff; Leslie Martel; Lisa Ferrone
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2004-04-09       Impact factor: 3.078

7.  Redefining overweight and obesity in rheumatoid arthritis patients.

Authors:  Antonios Stavropoulos-Kalinoglou; Giorgos S Metsios; Yiannis Koutedakis; Alan M Nevill; Karen M Douglas; Athanasios Jamurtas; Jet J C S Veldhuijzen van Zanten; Mourad Labib; George D Kitas
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2007-02-08       Impact factor: 19.103

8.  Underweight and obese states both associate with worse disease activity and physical function in patients with established rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Antonios Stavropoulos-Kalinoglou; Giorgos S Metsios; Vasileios F Panoulas; Alan M Nevill; Athanasios Z Jamurtas; Yiannis Koutedakis; George D Kitas
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2008-12-19       Impact factor: 2.980

9.  Impact of 24 months of anti-TNF therapy versus methotrexate on body weight in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a prospective observational study.

Authors:  Paolo Sfriso; Francesco Caso; Giuseppe Sebastiano Filardo; Costantino Botsios; Luisa Costa; Raffaele Scarpa; Silvano Todesco; Paolo Spinella; Francesca Oliviero; Leonardo Punzi
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2016-04-06       Impact factor: 2.980

10.  Evaluation of Margaria staircase test: the effect of body size.

Authors:  Aleksandar Nedeljkovic; Dragan M Mirkov; Nemanja Pazin; Slobodan Jaric
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2007-02-02       Impact factor: 3.346

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.