Comparison of Two Independent Measures of Anaerobic Capacity in Women and Men

Authors

Brady C. McLain, University of North TexasFollow
Austin B. Shaw, University of North TexasFollow
Ethan J. Hein, University of North TexasFollow
Claudio A. Gobatto, University of Campinas, Limeira, São Paulo, BrazilFollow
Marcelo Papoti, University of São Paulo, School of Physical Education and Sports, Ribeirão Preto, BrazilFollow
Fúlvia de Barros Manchado-Gobatto, University of Campinas, School of Applied Sciences, Limiera, BrazilFollow
David W. Hill, University of North TexasFollow
Madison B. Landtiser, University of North TexasFollow
Jacob L. McNary, University of North TexasFollow
Sarah E. Deemer, University of North TexasFollow
Lydia K. Caldwell, University of North TexasFollow

Abstract

Maximal accumulated oxygen deficit (MAOD) is the gold standard measure to evaluate anaerobic capacity. An alternative to MAOD is ‘MAOD_alt’, which is based on post-exercise measures. While MAOD requires multiple tests to evaluate anaerobic capacity, MAOD_alt requires a single exhaustive test. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine if MAOD_alt is a valid measure of anaerobic capacity in women and men during cycling[BM2] ergometer exercise. METHODS: Seven women (age 24 ± 3 y, height 166 ± 9 cm, weight 64 ± 13 kg) and nine men (22 ± 2 y, 185 ± 9 cm, 74 ± 10 kg) performed a severe constant power test [BM3] to exhaustion on a cycle ergometer. MAOD was calculated using published methods, as the difference between the estimated oxygen demand and the aerobic contribution. MAOD_alt was calculated as the sum of glycolytic contribution (from post-exercise blood lactate concentrations) and the PCr contribution (from the post exercise VO₂ response). Values for MAOD and MAOD_alt were compared via a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA; Method x Sex), post hoc t-tests (significance at p < 0.05), and Pearson correlation tests. RESULTS: Results from the two-way ANOVA revealed a significant interaction effect between sex and measures of anaerobic capacity (p = 0.031). In women, MAOD_alt ‘=’ MAOD (post hoc, p = 0.07), correlation, r = 0.71 (p = 0.07). In men, MAOD_alt ‘=’ MAOD (post hoc, p = 0.29), correlation, r = 0.95 (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: MAOD_alt is valid in this group of women and men.

Recommended Citation

McLain, Brady C.; Shaw, Austin B.; Hein, Ethan J.; Gobatto, Claudio A.; Papoti, Marcelo; Manchado-Gobatto, Fúlvia de Barros; Hill, David W.; Landtiser, Madison B.; McNary, Jacob L.; Deemer, Sarah E.; and Caldwell, Lydia K. (2025) "Comparison of Two Independent Measures of Anaerobic Capacity in Women and Men," International Journal of Exercise Science: Conference Proceedings: Vol. 2: Iss. 17, Article 73.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/ijesab/vol2/iss17/73