Home > Journals > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness > Past Issues > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2021 October;61(10) > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2021 October;61(10):1354-61

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe PROMO
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as
Share

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLE  BODY COMPOSITION, NUTRITION AND SUPPLEMENTATION 

The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2021 October;61(10):1354-61

DOI: 10.23736/S0022-4707.20.11747-X

Copyright © 2020 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

A systematic comparison of commonly used stoichiometric equations to estimate fat oxidation during exercise in athletes

Ratko PERIC 1 , Alberto DI PIETRO 2, Jonathan MYERS 3, Zoran NIKOLOVSKI 4

1 Sport Studio BL Association for Contemporary Education in Sports, Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina; 2 Cosmed Srl, Rome, Italy; 3 VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA; 4 Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Split, Split, Croatia



BACKGROUND: Over the last half-century, different stoichiometric equations for calculating the energy cost of exercise based upon the combustion of mixtures of carbohydrates, fats, and proteins have been proposed and modified. With the means of indirect calorimetry, while measuring oxygen uptake, carbon dioxide production, and urinary urea nitrogen excretion, the contribution of specific substrates to overall energy production can be estimated. However, even with their long history of application, no previous studies have evaluated whether the use of different stoichiometric equations provides similar or distinct maximal fat oxidation rate (MFO) responses and information regarding MFO location (FATmax) in male athletes.
METHODS: Twenty healthy male athletes performed graded exercise testing (GXT) cycle ergometry using breath by breath gas analysis to assess fat oxidation and maximal oxygen uptake. Analysis of variance followed by within-equation effects, within-equation factors, and post hoc pairwise comparisons were used to examine within-equation differences.
RESULTS: Compared stoichiometric equations demonstrated significant differences in the mean and maximal fat oxidation rates, varying up to nearly 7%. FATmax differences, however, were not noticed.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that for within-study designs, the equation used appears to be less important, but when inter-study comparisons are planned, caution is in order due to the presence of inter-equation differences.


KEY WORDS: Metabolism; Exercise; Athletic performance

top of page