Leandro Camati Felippe1,2, Taynara Gonçalves Melo3, Marcos D Silva-Cavalcante3,4, Guilherme Assunção Ferreira3,4, Daniel Boari5, Romulo Bertuzzi6, Adriano E Lima-Silva3,4. 1. Sport Science Research Group, Academic Center of Vitoria, Federal University of Pernambuco, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil. leandro.camati@ufpe.br. 2. Human Performance Research Group, Federal University of Technology-Paraná, Curitiba, Parana, Brazil. leandro.camati@ufpe.br. 3. Sport Science Research Group, Academic Center of Vitoria, Federal University of Pernambuco, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil. 4. Human Performance Research Group, Federal University of Technology-Paraná, Curitiba, Parana, Brazil. 5. Center of Engineering, Modeling and Applied Social Science, Federal University of ABC, Santo André, São Paulo, Brazil. 6. Endurance Performance Research Group (GEDAE-USP), University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship between the recovery of neuromuscular fatigue and the recovery of amount of work done above critical power (W´). METHODS: Ten healthy men performed, on different days, constant work rate exercises until task failure to determine critical power (CP) and W´. In the three following visits, participants performed two exhausting constant work rate exercises estimated to induce task failure within 6 min (P61 and P62), interspaced by 3, 6 or 15 min of recovery. Neuromuscular function was assessed before and periodically after the P61 using percutaneous electrical femoral nerve stimulation. The W´ recovery was measured from the total work performed above CP during the P62. RESULTS: The P61 induced a full use of W´ and a reduction in maximal voluntary contraction (MVC, - 19 ± 4%), voluntary activation (VA, - 6 ± 2%) and twitch force stimulated at 1 Hz (- 37 ± 11%), 10 Hz (- 50 ± 16%) and 100 Hz (- 32 ± 11%), when compared to baseline (P < 0.05). The time constant of VA recovery was significantly faster than the time constant of W´ recovery (P < 0.05), but there was no significant difference between the time constant of W´ recovery and the time constant of recovery of MVC or twitch force stimulated at 1, 10 and 100 Hz (P > 0.05). However, the time constant of W´ recovery was only associated to the time constant of MVC recovery (r = 0.73, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The W´ recovery is not associated to the recovery of peripheral or central fatigue alone. Rather, W´ seems to be associated to the recovery of the overall capacity to generate force.
PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship between the recovery of neuromuscular fatigue and the recovery of amount of work done above critical power (W´). METHODS: Ten healthy men performed, on different days, constant work rate exercises until task failure to determine critical power (CP) and W´. In the three following visits, participants performed two exhausting constant work rate exercises estimated to induce task failure within 6 min (P61 and P62), interspaced by 3, 6 or 15 min of recovery. Neuromuscular function was assessed before and periodically after the P61 using percutaneous electrical femoral nerve stimulation. The W´ recovery was measured from the total work performed above CP during the P62. RESULTS: The P61 induced a full use of W´ and a reduction in maximal voluntary contraction (MVC, - 19 ± 4%), voluntary activation (VA, - 6 ± 2%) and twitch force stimulated at 1 Hz (- 37 ± 11%), 10 Hz (- 50 ± 16%) and 100 Hz (- 32 ± 11%), when compared to baseline (P < 0.05). The time constant of VA recovery was significantly faster than the time constant of W´ recovery (P < 0.05), but there was no significant difference between the time constant of W´ recovery and the time constant of recovery of MVC or twitch force stimulated at 1, 10 and 100 Hz (P > 0.05). However, the time constant of W´ recovery was only associated to the time constant of MVC recovery (r = 0.73, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The W´ recovery is not associated to the recovery of peripheral or central fatigue alone. Rather, W´ seems to be associated to the recovery of the overall capacity to generate force.
Authors: Andrew M Alexander; Shane M Hammer; Kaylin D Didier; Lillie M Huckaby; Thomas J Barstow Journal: Appl Physiol Nutr Metab Date: 2022-01-12 Impact factor: 2.665
Authors: Fabiano Tomazini; Ana Carla Santos-Mariano; Vinicius F Dos S Andrade; Daniel B Coelho; Romulo Bertuzzi; Gleber Pereira; Marcos D Silva-Cavalcante; Adriano E Lima-Silva Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2022-05-25 Impact factor: 3.346