Mechanically versus electro-magnetically braked cycle ergometer: performance and energy cost of the Wingate Anaerobic Test

Abstract

Performance and metabolic profiles of the Wingate Anaerobic Test (WAnT) were compared between a mechanically resisted (ME) and an electro-magnetically braked (EE) cycle ergometer. Fifteen healthy subjects (24.0±3.5 years, 180.5±6.1 cm, 75.4±11.9 kg) performed a WAnT on ME, and EE 3 days apart. Performance was measured as peak power (PP), minimum power (MP), mean power (AP), time to PP (TTPP), fatigue rate (FR), and maximum cadence (RPM_MAX). Lactic (W _LAC) and alactic (W _PCR) anaerobic energy were calculated from net lactate appearance and the fast component of post-exercise oxygen uptake. Aerobic metabolism (W _AER) was calculated from oxygen uptake during the WAnT. Total energy cost (W _TOT) was calculated as the sum of W _LAC, W _PCR, and W _AER. There was no difference between ME and EE in PP (873±159 vs. 931±193 W) or AP (633±89 vs. 630±89 W). In the EE condition TTPP (2.3±0.7 vs. 4.3±0.7 s) was longer (P<0.001), MP (464±78 vs. 388±57 W) was lower (P<0.001), FR (15.2±5.2 vs. 20.5±6.8%) was higher (P<0.005), and RPM_MAX (168±18 vs. 128±15 rpm) was slower (P<0.001). There was no difference in W _TOT (1,331±182 vs. 1,373±120 J kg⁻¹), W _AER (292±76 vs. 309±72 J kg⁻¹), W _PCR (495±153 vs. 515±111 J kg⁻¹) or W _LAC (545±132 vs. 549±141 J kg⁻¹) between ME and EE devices. The EE produces distinctly different performance measures but valid metabolic WAnT results that may be used to evaluate anaerobic fitness.