In the abstract, the values of data are incorrect. The full corrected abstract should read: The purpose of this study was to verify whether the exercise modality (i.e., running and cycling) alters the magnitude of “anaerobic” capacity estimated by a single supramaximal effort (AC[La]+EPOCfast). Fourteen healthy men (age: 26±9 years) underwent a maximum incremental test and a supramaximal effort to exhaustion at 115% of the intensity associated with maximal oxygen uptake to determine the AC[La]+EPOCfast (i.e., the sum of both oxygen equivalents from the glycolytic and phosphagen pathways), performed on both a treadmill and cycle ergometer. The maximal oxygen uptake during running was higher (p = 0.001; large effect size) vs. cycling (49.2±3.8 mL·kg-1·min-1 vs. 44.7±5.7 mL·kg-1·min-1, respectively). Contrarily, the oxygen equivalent from the glycolytic metabolism was not different between exercise modalities (p = 0.133; small effect size; running = 2.27±0.51 L and cycling = 2.33±0.49 L). Furthermore, the “anaerobic” capacity was likely meaningfully (3.9±0.6 L and 54.1±6.0 mL·kg-1) and very likely meaningfully greater in running than cycling (3.6±0.7 L and 49.2±6.1 mL·kg). Additionally, the contribution of the phosphagen metabolism was higher (p = 0.001; large effect size) for running compared to cycling (1.6±0.3 L vs.1.3±0.3 L respectively). Therefore, the “anaerobic” capacity estimated by the sum of both oxygen equivalents from the glycolytic and phosphagen pathways during a supramaximal effort is influenced by exercise modality and is able to identify the difference in phosphagen metabolic contribution, based on the methodological conditions of this study.