Muscle Coordination during an Outdoor Cycling Time Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE: Muscle activity in cycling has primarily been studied in the laboratory; however, conclusions are limited by the ability to recreate realistic environmental conditions. The purpose of this study was to determine muscle coordination patterns in an outdoor time trial and investigate their relationships to power output (PO), total muscle activity (Itot), overall mechanical efficiency (ηO), cadence, and gradient. METHODS: Surface EMG, gradient, and cycling parameters were measured while cycling 18.8 km outdoors. A principal component analysis was used to establish coordination patterns that were compared with Itot, ηO, PO, cadence, and gradient. RESULTS: PO was positively correlated with Itot, and high PO was associated with elevated rectus femoris and vastus lateralis activity and synchronization of muscles crossing the same joint. PO and cadence demonstrated positive and negative relationships, respectively, with gradient. Relationships between muscle coordination, PO, ηO, Itot, and gradient showed that muscle coordination, PO, and ηO fluctuate during an outdoor time trial as a result of pacing and gradient. A trade-off existed between ηO and PO, and ηO was dependent on muscle activation around the top and bottom of the pedal cycle and activity in more than the knee extensor muscles. Fluctuations in muscle activity due to the changing PO, from pacing and terrain, seemed to mitigate fatigue indices seen in indoor cycling studies. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that muscle activity is dependent on the terrain aspects of the cycle course as muscle coordination changes with the altered locomotor demands. The coordination patterns significantly covaried with PO, Itot, ηO, cadence, and gradient, which highlights the importance of recording these parameters under field conditions and/or careful reproduction of outdoor environments in indoor studies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".