IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0163389.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validity and Reliability of Ventilatory and Blood Lactate Thresholds in Well-Trained Cyclists

Author

Listed:
  • Jesús G Pallarés
  • Ricardo Morán-Navarro
  • Juan Fernando Ortega
  • Valentín Emilio Fernández-Elías
  • Ricardo Mora-Rodriguez

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine, i) the reliability of blood lactate and ventilatory-based thresholds, ii) the lactate threshold that corresponds with each ventilatory threshold (VT1 and VT2) and with maximal lactate steady state test (MLSS) as a proxy of cycling performance. Methods: Fourteen aerobically-trained male cyclists (V˙O2max 62.1±4.6 ml·kg-1·min-1) performed two graded exercise tests (50 W warm-up followed by 25 W·min-1) to exhaustion. Blood lactate, V˙O2 and V˙CO2 data were collected at every stage. Workloads at VT1 (rise in V˙E/V˙O2;) and VT2 (rise in V˙E/V˙CO2) were compared with workloads at lactate thresholds. Several continuous tests were needed to detect the MLSS workload. Agreement and differences among tests were assessed with ANOVA, ICC and Bland-Altman. Reliability of each test was evaluated using ICC, CV and Bland-Altman plots. Results: Workloads at lactate threshold (LT) and LT+2.0 mMol·L-1 matched the ones for VT1 and VT2, respectively (p = 0.147 and 0.539; r = 0.72 and 0.80; Bias = -13.6 and 2.8, respectively). Furthermore, workload at LT+0.5 mMol·L-1 coincided with MLSS workload (p = 0.449; r = 0.78; Bias = -4.5). Lactate threshold tests had high reliability (CV = 3.4–3.7%; r = 0.85–0.89; Bias = -2.1–3.0) except for DMAX method (CV = 10.3%; r = 0.57; Bias = 15.4). Ventilatory thresholds show high reliability (CV = 1.6%–3.5%; r = 0.90–0.96; Bias = -1.8–2.9) except for RER = 1 and V-Slope (CV = 5.0–6.4%; r = 0.79; Bias = -5.6–12.4). Conclusions: Lactate threshold tests can be a valid and reliable alternative to ventilatory thresholds to identify the workloads at the transition from aerobic to anaerobic metabolism.

Suggested Citation

  • Jesús G Pallarés & Ricardo Morán-Navarro & Juan Fernando Ortega & Valentín Emilio Fernández-Elías & Ricardo Mora-Rodriguez, 2016. "Validity and Reliability of Ventilatory and Blood Lactate Thresholds in Well-Trained Cyclists," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-16, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0163389
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0163389
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0163389
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0163389&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0163389?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0163389. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.