Biomechanics of Cycling

Fonda, Borut; Šarabon, Nejc

doi:10.2478/v10237-011-0012-0

Cited by 28 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Endurance cycling is biomechanically similar to many of the strength exercises performed in the present study (16) and may essentially lead to a similar magnitude of fatigue as indicated, for example, by inhibited neuromuscular performance observed during a single isometric contraction (32,33), suggesting similar acute neural responses to both types of loadings. Furthermore, previous studies have shown that endurance cycling training may also lead to small but significant increases in muscle CSA (28) and strength (24) in physically active subjects with no experience in regular endurance or strength training.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Fitness and Lean Mass Increases during Combined Training Independent of Loading Order

Schumann

Küüsmaa

Newton

et al. 2014

Medicine &Amp; Science in Sports &Amp; Exercise

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Although the benefits of combined endurance (E) and strength (S) training for the development of physical fitness and health are well known, scientific examination of the effect of loading order when E and S are combined into the same training session (E+S vs. S+E) is rare. This study investigated the effects of moderate frequency E+S versus S+E training on physical fitness, body composition and blood lipids. Methods:Physically active and healthy young men performed E+S (n=16) or S+E (n=18) training, 2-3 x·wk -1 for 24weeks. Endurance (by incremental bike test) and strength (by dynamic leg press) performance as well as body composition (by DXA), muscle cross-sectional area of vastus lateralis (by ultrasound) and blood lipids were determined before and after the intervention. Results: Time to exhaustion, aerobic power (W) and 1RM strength significantly increased in the two groups at week 24 (E+S 12-15%, p=0.003-0.001; S+E 16-17%, p<0.001) but no between-group difference was observed. Similarly, the two groups significantly increased total lean mass (E+S 3%, S+E 3%, both p=0.001) and muscle cross-sectional area (E+S 14%, p=0.001; S+E 16%, p<0.001) at week 24 to a similar extent. No significant changes in body fat or blood lipids were observed in either of the two groups at week 24. Conclusion: These results showed that moderate frequency (2-3 x·wk -1 ) combined E+S or S+E training led to significant improvements in physical fitness and lean body mass but did not induce significant changes in body fat or blood lipids. Furthermore, as no between-group differences were observed, these results indicate that loading order does not seem to affect training adaptations of healthy moderately active young men.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Fitness and Lean Mass Increases during Combined Training Independent of Loading Order

Schumann

Küüsmaa

Newton

et al. 2014

Medicine &Amp; Science in Sports &Amp; Exercise

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cycling is one of the most studied sports activities, with particular emphasis being placed on neuromuscular aspects (Bini and Diefenthaeler 2009;Ericson 1986;Fonda and Sarabon 2010a;Too 1990). Indeed, numerous research groups have examined the neuromuscular activation and adaptation background of the bicycle pedaling movement by observing the timing and intensity of muscular activity using surface electromyography (EMG); for review see Hug and Dorel (2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Change of muscle activation patterns in uphill cycling of varying slope

Šarabon

Fonda²,

Marković

2011

Eur J Appl Physiol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present study, we quantitatively described and compared lower extremity neuromuscular patterns during level cycling (LC), 10 and 20% uphill cycling (UC). We hypothesized that both the timing and intensity of activity of selected lower extremity muscles will differ between steep (but not moderate slope) UC condition and LC. Twelve trained mountain bikers performed an experimental test with three different cycling conditions (level, 10% slope and 20% slope) with EMG monitoring of eight lower extremity muscles. Significant changes (p < 0.05) in muscle activation timing during 20% UC compared to LC (15° later onset and 39° earlier offset) were observed in m. rectus femoris (RF). Range of activity during 20% UC compared to LC was also significantly (p < 0.05) modified in m. vastus medialis, m. vastus lateralis (8° and 5° shorter) and m. biceps femoris (BF; 17° longer). Furthermore, a reduction of EMG activity level was observed for RF and m. tibialis anterior (TA) during 20% UC compared to LC (25 and 19%; p < 0.05), while the opposite effect was observed for m. gluteus maximus (GM; 12%; p < 0.05). Peak cross-correlation coefficients in all cycling conditions for all muscles were high (all coefficients ≥ 0.83). We have shown that altered body orientation during steep, but not moderate, slope UC significantly modified the timing and intensity of several lower extremity muscles, the most affected being those that cross the hip joint and TA. The observed modifications in neuromuscular patterns during 20% UC could have a significant effect on lower extremity joint kinetics and cycling efficiency.

show abstract

“…A body of literature resulting from research into the interaction between certain cycling conditions and biomechanical parameters of cycling has already been published, for a review see Fonda and Sarabon (2010a). This research concentrated on particular problems such as: on enhancing performance (Faria et al, 2005;Jeukendrup and Martin, 2001); on improving rehabilitation protocols (Ericson, 1986); on improving comfort (Gámez et al, 2008); and on preventing harmful effects caused by cycling (Burke, 1994;Silberman et al, 2005;de Vey Mestdagh, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%