IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i3p870-d483759.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Indoor Cycling Energy Expenditure: Does Sequence Matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Cristina Cortis

    (Department of Human Sciences, Society and Health, University of Cassino and Lazio Meridionale, 03043 Cassino, Italy)

  • Andrea Fusco

    (Department of Human Sciences, Society and Health, University of Cassino and Lazio Meridionale, 03043 Cassino, Italy)

  • Mitchell Cook

    (Department of Exercise and Sport Science, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, La Crosse, WI 54601, USA)

  • Scott T. Doberstein

    (Department of Exercise and Sport Science, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, La Crosse, WI 54601, USA)

  • Cordial Gillette

    (Department of Exercise and Sport Science, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, La Crosse, WI 54601, USA)

  • John P. Porcari

    (Department of Exercise and Sport Science, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, La Crosse, WI 54601, USA)

  • Carl Foster

    (Department of Exercise and Sport Science, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, La Crosse, WI 54601, USA)

Abstract

Although cycling class intensity can be modified by changing interval intensity sequencing, it has not been established whether the intensity order can alter physiological and perceptual responses. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the effects of interval intensity sequencing on energy expenditure (EE), physiological markers, and perceptual responses during indoor cycling. Healthy volunteers (10 males = 20.0 ± 0.8years; 8 females = 21.3 ± 2.7years) completed three randomly ordered interval bouts (mixed pyramid—MP, ascending intervals—AI, descending intervals—DI) including three 3-min work bouts at 50%, 75%, and 100% of peak power output (PPO) and three 3-min recovery periods at 25% PPO. Heart rate (HR) and oxygen consumption (VO 2 ) were expressed as percentages of maximal HR (%HR max ) and VO 2 (%VO 2max ). EE was computed for both the work bout and for the 5-min recovery period. Session Rating of Perceived Exertion (sRPE) and Exercise Enjoyment Scale (EES) were recorded. No differences emerged for % HR max (MP = 73.3 ± 6.1%; AI = 72.1 ± 4.9%; DI = 71.8 ± 4.5%), % VO 2max (MP = 51.8 ± 4.6%; AI = 51.4 ± 3.9%; DI = 51.3 ± 4.5%), EE (MP = 277.5 ± 39.9 kcal; AI = 275.8 ± 39.4 kcal; DI = 274.9 ± 42.1 kcal), EES (MP = 4.9 ± 1.0; AI = 5.3 ± 1.1; DI = 4.9 ± 0.9), and sRPE (MP = 4.9 ± 1.0; AI = 5.3 ± 1.1; DI = 4.9 ± 0.9). EE during recovery was significantly ( p < 0.005) lower after DI (11.9 ± 3.2 kcal) with respect to MP (13.2 ± 2.5 kcal) and AI (13.3 ± 2.5 kcal). Although lower EE was observed during recovery in DI, interval intensity sequencing does not affect overall EE, physiological markers, and perceptual responses.

Suggested Citation

  • Cristina Cortis & Andrea Fusco & Mitchell Cook & Scott T. Doberstein & Cordial Gillette & John P. Porcari & Carl Foster, 2021. "Indoor Cycling Energy Expenditure: Does Sequence Matter?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-8, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:3:p:870-:d:483759
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/3/870/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/3/870/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sylvia Binkley & Carl Foster & Cristina Cortis & Jos J. de Koning & Christopher Dodge & Scott T. Doberstein & Andrea Fusco & Salvador J. Jaime & John P. Porcari, 2021. "Summated Hazard Score as a Powerful Predictor of Fatigue in Relation to Pacing Strategy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-14, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:3:p:870-:d:483759. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.