William M. Miller1, Majid M. Abdul1, Jason D. Wagganer1, Thomas J. Pujol1, FACSM, Mark E. Langenfeld1, FACSM, Jeremy T. Barnes1, Jeremy P. Loenneke2, and William V. Logan1; 1Southeast Missouri State University, Cape Girardeau, Missouri; 2 The University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma

The criterion measure for cardiorespiratory fitness (i.e., ability to perform aerobic activity for prolonged sessions) is maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max), which is associated with muscle mass. Measuring VO2max is time consuming and requires specific facilities; creating an alternative way to predict VO2max using lean leg mass would increase accessibility in estimating VO2max. Graff et al. (2013) developed a formula for prediction of VO2max from leanleg mass specific to obese individuals. PURPOSE: To assess the ability of body mass, total lean body mass and total lean leg mass to predict VO2max in normal body weight cyclists using a previously established VO2max predictive equation. (Graff et al., 2013). METHODS: Twenty-four normal weight subjects (18 men, 6 women, mean ± SD; BMI: 23.5 ± 3.6 kg·m2; age: 38.7 ± 11.9; ht: 177.4 ± 5.7 cm; wt: 74.3 ± 12.9 kg) participated voluntarily. A total body Dual Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry scan was used to assess body composition. The same day, subjects performed a maximal graded exercise test to assess VO2max using indirect calorimetry. A self-selected VO2max cycle ergometer test was performed to volitional exhaustion. A multiple regression equation, using the stepwise method, was executed using SPSS (v19) software. RESULTS: Total body mass was 74.3 ± 12.9 kg, total lean body mass 57.9 ± 8.9 kg, total lean leg mass 19.8 ± 3.0 kg, measured VO2max 3.95 ± 0.8 L·min-1. Using the Graff et al. (2013) equation (VO2max = (0.23 × kg lean leg mass) + 0.078) predicted VO2max was 4.63 ± 0.7 L·min-1, with lean leg mass being the strongest predictor of VO2max (p < 0.001). Graff et al. found a variance of 76.8% in VO2max (r=0.877) explained by lean leg mass, compared to our variance of 55.4% (r = 0.744) with a standard error of the estimate of 0.575 L·min-1. CONCLUSIONS: Predicted VO2max overestimated the measured VO2max­ by 0.68 L·min-1. Therefore, while lean leg mass was strongly associated with predicted VO2max there was a large difference between measured vs. predicted VO2max, most likely due to applying normal weight cyclist data into the Graff et al. (2013) equation.

This document is currently not available here.