International Journal of Anthropology

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 263–273 | Cite as

Factors influencing back strength and the changes due to age of the oraon agricultural labourers of jalpaiguri district, west bengal

  • Subrata K. Roy
  • Baidyanath Pal
Article
  • 5 Downloads

Abstract

Muscle strength is a major component of successful performance in almost every activity of daily living and it is critical to health and well-being. Anthropometric, blood pressure and strength measurements were taken from Oraon agricultural labourers of Jalpaiguri district of West Bengal. The data were analyzed to find out the differences between high and low back strength groups of both sexes in different traits of the parameters mentioned above. Secondly, identifying the peak age of muscle strength in both sex and the declining ages. Thirdly, the influencing factors which, affect the back strength. The results show that high back strength groups have higher mean values of most of the anthropometric traits compared to low back strength groups and the differences are significant in case of males, but females show significant differences in few traits. Blood pressures are relatively low in high back strength groups compared to low back strength groups in both sexes. The peak age for higher back strength seems to be within the age of 24 years for males and 20 years for females. The predictive variables for males were found to be grip strength and subscapular skinfold thickness, but females show grip strength, BMI, biceps girth, bicondylar diameter of humerus. The differences in influencing factors between males and females have been sorted out from sociocultural practice of the population.

Key words

Oraon Strength Anthropometry Blood pressure Age change 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Astrand, P.O. and Rodahl, K. 1986. Textbook of Work Physiology: Physiological Cases of Exercise, 2nd Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Inc.Google Scholar
  2. Berne, R.M. and Levy, M.N. 1983. Physiology, St. Louis, MO: CV Mosby Co.Google Scholar
  3. Choudhury, M.R. 1978. The Tea Industry in India: A Diagnostic Analysis of its Geoeconomic Studies. Oxford Book and Stationary Company. Calcutta.Google Scholar
  4. Frontera, W.R., Meredith, C.N. and O’Reilly K.P. 1988. Strength conditioning in older men: Skeletal muscle hypertrophy and improved function. Journal of Applied Physiology, 64:1038–1044.Google Scholar
  5. Keys, A., Brozek, J. Henschel, A. Mickelsen, O. and Taylor, H.N. 1950. Biology of Human Starvation, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.Google Scholar
  6. Kraus, H. and Hirschland, R.P. 1953. Minimum mascular fitness tests in schools children. Research Quarterly, 25: 177–188.Google Scholar
  7. Laubach, L.L. and McConville, J.T. 1969. The relationship of strength to body size and typology. Medicine and Science in Sports, 1/4, 189–194.Google Scholar
  8. Lexell J. Taylor CC, Sjostrom M. 1988. What is the cause of ageing atrophy? Total number, size and proportion of different fiber types studied in whole vastus lateralis muscle from 15 to 83 year old men. Journal of Neurological Science, 84:275–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mathews, D.K. 1973 Measurement in Physical Education. W.B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  10. Mathiowetz, V., Rennells, C. and Donahoe, L. 1985. Grip and Pinch strength: Normative data for adults. Archives for Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 66:69–74.Google Scholar
  11. McDonangh MJN, Davies CTM. 1984. Adaptive response of mammalian skeletal muscle to exercise with high loads. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 52:139–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Nordgren, B. 1972. Anthropometric measures and muscle strength in young women. Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitative Medicine, 4/4:65–169.Google Scholar
  13. Prokopec, M. 1987. Changing patterns of growth, development and ageing in the population of Czechoslovakia. Collegium Antropologicum, 11:91–115.Google Scholar
  14. Roberts, D.F., Provins, K.A. and Morton, R.J. 1959. Arm strength and body dimensions. Human Biology, 31/4, 334–343.Google Scholar
  15. Rose, G.A., Blackburn, H., Gillum, R.F. and Mrines, R.J. 1980. Cardiovascular Survey Methods. WHO Publications, 56. World Health Organization, Geneva.Google Scholar
  16. Roy, S.K. and Pal, B. 2000. Land-labourer realtionship and effect on the working efficiency: anthropometry and health traits of the Oraon agricultural workers of Jalpaiguri district of West Bengal. The Anthropologist (in press).Google Scholar
  17. Roy, S.K. and Pal, B. 1999. Anthropometric and physiological traits: age changes among the Oraon agricultural labourers of Jalpaiguri district, Northern West Bengal. Anthropologicher Anzeiger. (in press).Google Scholar
  18. Ruff, S. and Strughold, H. 1942. Compendium of Aviation Medicine. WADC Technical Report 14, OH, Wright Air Development Center, Air Research and Development Command. United States Air Force pp. 32–34. Schimdt, R.T. and Toews, J.V. 1970. Grip strength as measured by Jamar Dynamometer. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 51:321–327.Google Scholar
  19. Teraoka, T. 1979. Studies on the peculiarity of Grip Strength in relation to body positions and aging. Kobe Journal of Medical Sciences, 25:1–17.Google Scholar
  20. Thompson LV. 1994. Effects of age and training on skeletal muscle physiology and performance. Physical Thermodynamics, 74:71–81.Google Scholar
  21. Weiner, J.S. and Lourie, J.A. (eds.) 1981. Practical Human Biology. Academic Press. London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Institute for the Study of Man 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Subrata K. Roy
    • 1
  • Baidyanath Pal
    • 1
  1. 1.Anthropology and Human Genetics UnitIndian Statistical InstituteCalcuttaIndia

Personalised recommendations