| Literature DB >> 28349084 |
Mohd Rahimi Che Jusoh1, Stephen R Stannard1, Toby Mündel1.
Abstract
This study determined whether sago porridge ingested immediately after exercise (Exercise 1) in warm-humid conditions (30 ± 1°C, 71 ± 4 % RH; 20 km·h-1 frontal airflow) conferred more rapid recovery, as measured by repeat performance (Exercise 2), compared to a control condition. Eight well-trained, male cyclists/triathletes (34 ± 9 y, VO2peak 70 ± 10 ml·kg-1·min-1, peak aerobic power 413 ± 75 W) completed two 15-min time-trials pre-loaded with 15-min warm-up cycling following >24h standardization of training and diet. Mean power output was not different between trials during Exercise 1 (286 ± 67 vs. 281 ± 59 W), however, was reduced during Exercise 2 for control (274 ± 61 W) but not sago (283 ± 60 W) that led to a significant performance decrement (vs. Exercise 1) of 3.9% for control and an improvement (vs. control) of 3.7% for sago during Exercise 2 (P < 0.05). Sago ingestion was also associated with higher blood glucose concentrations during recovery compared to control. These results indicate that feeding sago during recovery from exercise in a warm-humid environment improves recovery of performance during a subsequent exercise bout when compared to a water-only control. As these effects were larger than the test-retest coefficient of variation for work completed during the 15-min time-trial (2.3%) it can be confidently concluded that the observed effects are real.Entities:
Keywords: exercise; heat stress; humidity; southeast Asia; starch
Year: 2016 PMID: 28349084 PMCID: PMC5079217 DOI: 10.1080/23328940.2016.1179382
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Temperature (Austin) ISSN: 2332-8940
Figure 1.A schematic overview of the experimental protocol.
Individual performances (A) and measures of test-retest reliability (B) for work completed (kJ) during the 15-min cycling time trial following a 15-min warm-up. Trials 1 and 2 refer to Exercise 1 for Control and Sago.
| | | | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Participant | Familiarization | Trial 1 | Trial 2 |
| 1 | 284.6 | 296.9 | 286.0 |
| 2 | 278.2 | 278.1 | 287.5 |
| 3 | 244.1 | 245.6 | 241.9 |
| 4 | 335.1 | 347.7 | 321.9 |
| 5 | 202.9 | 177.0 | 181.6 |
| 6 | 308.5 | 308.8 | 302.1 |
| 7 | 217.0 | 207.2 | 208.7 |
| 8 | 200.5 | 195.8 | 196.0 |
| Mean ± SD | 259 ± 51 | 257 ± 61 | 253 ± 53 |
Figure 2.Mean total work completed (kJ) during the 15-min time trial for Control and Sago trials before (Ex 1) and after (Ex 2) a 2-h recovery. ‡ indicates significantly different to Ex 1. † indicates significantly different to Con. Data are expressed as mean ± SE.
Figure 3.Plasma glucose and lactate concentrations during recovery (left panels) and Exercise 1 and 2 (right panels) for Control and Sago trials. TT: 15-min time-trial. Arrow indicates Sago ingestion. Data are expressed as mean ± SE. ‡ indicates significantly different to corresponding Exercise 1 time-point. † indicates significantly different to Con at that time-point.
Carbohydrate and fat oxidation rates (g·min−1) and RER during warm-up/steady-state exercise.
| Time (min) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exercise 1 | Exercise 2 | |||||
| 5 | 10 | 15 | 5 | 10 | 15 | |
| Control | 1.1 ± 0.4 | 2.2 ± 0.7* | 2.6 ± 0.5* | 0.8 ± 0.7 | 1.7 ± 0.6* | 2.3 ± 1.0*# |
| Sago | 1.2 ± 0.4 | 2.2 ± 0.7* | 2.3 ± 1.1* | 1.3 ± 0.5 | 1.6 ± 0.6 | 2.0 ± 0.6 |
| Control | 0.6 ± 0.2 | 0.5 ± 0.3 | 0.6 ± 0.2 | 0.7 ± 0.4 | 0.6 ± 0.3 | 0.7 ± 0.5 |
| Sago | 0.6 ± 0.3 | 0.5 ± 0.3 | 0.7 ± 0.5 | 0.5 ± 0.3 | 0.7 ± 0.3 | 0.8 ± 0.3 |
| Control | 0.87 ± 0.03 | 0.88 ± 0.04 | 0.91 ± 0.05* | 0.83 ± 0.03 | 0.85 ± 0.04 | 0.87 ± 0.04* |
| Sago | 0.86 ± 0.05 | 0.90 ± 0.05* | 0.92 ± 0.06* | 0.87 ± 0.05 | 0.87 ± 0.04 | 0.89 ± 0.05*# |
Data are presented as mean ± SE; N = 8; * denotes different to 5 min; # denotes different to 10 min.
Figure 4.Rectal and mean skin temperatures during Exercise 1 and 2 for Control and Sago trials. TT: 15-min time-trial. Arrow indicates Sago ingestion. Data are expressed as mean ± SE.
| | | |
|---|---|---|
| Measure of Reliability | Familiarization – Trial 1 | Trial 1 – Trial 2 |
| Intra-class Correlation Coefficient | 0.98 | 1.00 |
| Lower 95% confidence limit | 0.88 | 0.99 |
| Upper 95% confidence limit | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Change in Mean (%) | −1.8 | −1.9 |
| Lower 95% confidence limit | −7.1 | −4.4 |
| Upper 95% confidence limit | 3.7 | 0.8 |
| Typical Error as a CV (%) | 4.3 | 2.3 |
| Lower 95% confidence limit | 2.8 | 1.5 |
| Upper 95% confidence limit | 9.8 | 4.7 |