查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 不同間歇訓練對血漿乳酸與能量消耗的影響= |
---|---|
作者 | 張嘉珍; 林嘉志; |
期刊 | 成大體育 |
出版日期 | 20060700 |
卷期 | 39:3=50 民95.07 |
頁次 | 頁36-47 |
分類號 | 528.9013 |
語文 | chi |
關鍵詞 | 有氧間歇訓練; 高強度間歇訓練; 自行車運動員; Aerobic interval training; High-intensity interval training; Cyclists; |
中文摘要 | 目的:比較在戶外進行自行車單次有氧間歇訓練(aerobic interval training, AIT)及高強度間歇訓練(high-intensity interval training, HIT)對生理代謝的影響。方法:受試者為6 位大學業餘自行車運動員。在實驗室中以原地腳踏車測功儀以遞增性運動負荷測量無氧閾值(anaerobic threshold, AT)、最大攝氧量時對應的功率(Pmax)、時間(Tmax)及心率(HRmax)。相隔二天後,受試者於公路上以自行車測試2種不同的訓練模式:(1)HIT 模式(運動期的強度:Pmax;運動時間:60%Tmax;休息期為靜止休息降至65%HRmax;(2) AIT 模式(運動期: 90%AT;休息期的強度:1/2×90%AT;運動期與休息期切換的臨界點為AT或安靜態的VE/VO2)。以可攜式攝氧量分析儀(K4b2)監控AT 及研量能量消耗(energy expenditure, EE)。並在運動前、後及運動後l小時採集受試者血液,以分析血漿乳酸和血漿pH值。數據以相依樣本student's t test 檢定。結果:HIT模式在運動結束後的血漿乳酸值顯著高於AIT 棋式(3.87 +/-0.85 mM vs. 1.77 +/- 0.24 Mm, p<.05);AIT 棋式在運動後的血漿pH值顯著高於HIT模式(7.92 +/- 0.13 vs. 7.86 +/- 0.11 ,p< .05)。HIT與AIT模式的能量消耗並沒有顯著差異(46 .4 2±4 .4 7 kcal/kg vs. 37.48±5.95 kcal/kg,p> .05)。結論:以運動能量消耗觀點來看,AIT模式與HIT模式問並無差異。而AIT模式較HIT模式不易引起身體疲勞。 |
英文摘要 | Purpose: To compare the effect of physiological metabolism between AIT( aerobic interval training) and HIT (high-intensity interval training, HIT). Method: Six subjects recreational cyclists were recruited. Anaerobic threshold (AT) and Pmax, T max and HRmax were defined by exhaustive exercise on the treadmill in laboratory. Subjects proceeded interval trainings in the field including: (1) HIT (intensity of training phase: Pmax; duration: 60%T max; recovery phase: stop and rest until reaching 65%HRmax); (2) AIT (intensity of training phase: 90 %AT; intensity of active recovery phase: 1/2×90 %AT; critical point was judged by V E/VO2 at AT or resting). Blood samples were collected before, immediately after and 1 hr after exercise. Data were analyzed using dependent Student's t test. Result: Plasma lactate immediately after the HIT was significantly higher than that of AIT ( 3.87 +/- 0.85 vs. 1.77 +/- 0.24 mM, p <.05 ). Besides, plasma pH immediately after of AIT was significantly lower than that of HIT as well (7.92 +/- 0.13 vs. 7.86 +/- 0.11,p<.05). However, the difference of energy expenditure ( EE ) between AIT and HIT was insignificant (46.42 ± 4.47 vs. 37.48 ± 5.95 kcal/kg, p> .05 ). Conclusion: From point of view of energy expenditure during exercise, there is no difference between AIT and HIT. AIT is shown to be more resistant to fatigue than HIT. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。