Home > Journals > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness > Past Issues > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2000 December;40(4) > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2000 December;40(4):290-6

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe PROMO
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints
Permissions

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLES   

The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2000 December;40(4):290-6

Copyright © 2001 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Energy cost of treadmill running in non-trained females differing in body fat

Bunc V.

Sport Research Laboratory, Charles University Faculty of Physical Education and Sports, Prague, Czech Republic


PDF


Background. The ener­gy ­demands of move­ment may be char­ac­ter­ised by the ener­gy ­cost C, ­which indi­cates how ­much ener­gy is need­ed to car­ry a ­body ­mass of 1 kg ­over a dis­tance of 1 m. It is gen­er­al­ly accept­ed ­that the low­er C rep­re­sents a less­er ­amount of mechan­i­cal ­work exe­cut­ed ­with the ­same effi­cien­cy. The pur­pose of ­this ­study was to ­assess the influ­ence of ­body fat on ener­gy ­cost of run­ning in ­healthy non-­trained ­females.
Methods. Energy ­cost of run­ning (C) was deter­mined on the tread­mill in a ­group of ­healthy non-­trained ­females (N=63, ­mean age=39.1±10.2 ­years, ­body ­mass=64.6±5.5 kg, ­height= 166.2±5.7 cm, V.O2max.kg-1=35.0±3.6 ml.kg-1.min-1), dif­fer­ing sig­nif­i­cant­ly in the per­cent­age of ­body fat (18.9-30.2%), ­assessed by the 10 skin­fold meas­ure­ments.
Results. Mean val­ue of C was 3.97±0.07 J.kg-1.m-1. The low­est val­ues of C ­were ­found in sub­jects ­with the low­est %BF (C ­ranged ­from 3.81 to 4.06 J.kg-1.m-1). There is a sig­nif­i­cant pos­i­tive cor­re­la­tion ­between C and %BF [C (J.kg-1.m-1)= 0.0185*%BF (%) + 3.5090; r=0.7805; p<0.001; r2=0.6091], C and ­body ­mass (BM) [C (J.kg-1.m-1) = 0.0083*BM (kg) + 3.4384; r=0.6176; p<0.001; r2 = 0.3814], and C and ­free fat ­mass (FFM) [C (J.kg-1.m-1)=0.0087*FFM (kg) + 3.5543; r=0.3521; p<0.05; r2=0.1240]. There is a neg­a­tive cor­re­la­tion ­between C and V.O2max.kg-1 [C (J.kg-1.m-1)=-0.0181* V.O2max.kg-1 (ml.kg-1.min-1) +4.6071; r=-0.8810; p<0.0001; r2=0.7761], and V.O2max.kg-1 and %BF [V.O2max.kg-1 (ml.kg-1.min-1) =-0.8401* %BF(%) + 54.1021; r=-0.7142; p<0.0001; r2=0.5101].
Conclusions. From the col­lect­ed ­data for ­untrained ­females we may con­clude: first, the high­er the train­ing ­state (V.O2max.kg-1), the low­er the ener­gy ­cost of run­ning. Second, the ener­gy ­cost of run­ning C increas­es ­with the ­increase in ­body ­mass, %BF and FFM. Third, the train­ing ­state decreas­es (V.O2max.kg-1) ­with the ­increase in %BF.

top of page