Ventilatory Thresholds in Arm and Leg Exercises with Spontaneously Chosen Crank and Pedal Rates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study assessed whether the first and the second ventilatory thresholds (VT1 and VT2) were dependent on the muscle groups solicited when spontaneously chosen crank and pedal rates are used. 20 physical education male students (22 +/- 2.2 yr.) performed two maximal incremental tests randomly assigned using an increment of 15 and 30 W every minute for arm and leg exercises, respectively. These tests were used to measure the maximal oxygen uptake (VO2 max) and to identify VT1 and VT2. The absolute oxygen uptake (VO2) values measured at VT1, VT2, and at maximal workload were significantly (p < .05) lower during arm and leg exercises. However, VT1 and VT2 expressed in percent of VO2 max were not significantly different between arm and leg exercises (54.1 +/- 8.2 vs 57.2 +/- 11.4%; and 82.5 +/- 6.4 vs 84.6 +/- 5.1% at VT1 and VT2, respectively). In addition, at the two thresholds, none of the variables measured during arm and leg exercises were significantly correlated with the exception of spontaneously chosen crank and pedal rates (p < .01; r = .75 and r = .69 for VT1 and VT2, respectively). Probably due to the different training status and skill level, no extrapolation can be made to specify the arm thresholds from the leg. These results underline the need to specify the ventilatory thresholds from specific arm ergometer measures obtained from tests performed with spontaneously chosen crank and pedal rates and, thus, close to sport and recreational activities, when they are used for training and rehabilitation programs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".