DOC PREVIEW
UMass Amherst KIN 470 - kin 470 lab report 2; 2.28.14

This preview shows page 1-2-3-4 out of 12 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 12 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 12 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 12 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 12 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 12 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

Victoria NewburyLab Section; Tuesday 1:00Due Date: 2.28.14Kin 470 Exercise PhysiologyLab instructor; Ben HoffmanLab Report #2: Submaximal Exercise Energy Expenditure and RecoveryRESULTSParticipant 1 was considered a more active person than participant 2. Participant 1had a better net exercise economy than participant 2 but had higher oxygen deficits and EPOC. Participant 2 consumed a much lower amount of oxygen during exercise, her steady state oxygen consumption was nearly half that of participant 1.Table 1. Subject CharacteristicsGender Age Height Weight Training StatusP1 Female 21 5’4” 62.3 kg ActiveP2 Female 21 5’10” 63.5 Moderate (3-4x/week)Table 2. Submax VO2 ResultsSubject and workloadSteady state oxygen consumptiOxygen deficit (L)Net Caloric Expenditure for 5 min of exercise EPOC (L) Net ExerciseEconomy (1/W)on (L/min) (kcal)P1 workload 1 2.25 l/min 1.44 L 45.65 kcal 2.05 L .0304 l/WattP1 workload 2 2.96 l/min 4.69 L 63.4 kcal 3.28 L .021 l/WattP2 workload 1 .46 l/min -.06 L 8.85 kcal .75 L .0059 l/WattP2 workload 2 1.80 l/min 1.07 L 42.35 kcal 3.67 L .014 l/WattTable 3. VO2 Consumption for 25-minute periodParticipant 1 Participant 21 .45 .052 .43 .143 .41 .124 .40 .105 .43 .126 1.14 .537 1.92 .458 2.05 .459 2.25 .4410 2.45 .4911 1.40 .3012 .81 .2213 .60 .1814 .67 .2515 .69 .3316 1.73 1.1417 2.49 1.3918 2.86 1.6919 2.99 1.7020 3.04 2.0121 1.88 1.8222 1.15 .8623 .91 .5424 .80 .4525 .66 .53Graph 1. Oxygen Consumption vs. Time (both participants)00.511.522.533.5participant 1participant 2Graph 2. Oxygen Consumption vs. Time (participant 1)Graph 3. Oxygen Consumption vs. Time (participant 2)Calculations:Baseline VO2: add together the volume of oxygen consumed during the first five minutes and divide by 5Participant 1:(.45+.43+.41+.40+.43)/5 = .424 L/minParticipant 2:(.05+.14+.12+.10+.12)/5 = .106 L/minSteady Rate VO2: average of the last 3 minutes of exercise boutWorkload 1:Participant 1:(2.05+2.25+2.45)/3 = 2.25 l/minParticipant 2:(.45+.44+.49)/3 = .46 l/minWorkload 2:Participant 1:(2.86+2.99+3.04)/3 = 2.96 l/minParticipant 2:(1.69+1.70+2.01)/3 = 1.80 l/minTotal Exercise oxygen consumption: add volume of oxygen consumed during exerciseWorkload 1:Participant 1:1.14+1.92+2.05+2.25+2.45 = 9.81 LParticipant 2:.53+.45+.45+.44+.49 = 2.36 LWorkload 2:Participant 1:1.73+2.49+2.86+2.99+3.04 = 13.11 LParticipant 2:1.14+1.39+1.69+1.70+2.01 = 7.93 LTotal post exercise oxygen consumption: add volume of oxygen consumed after exerciseWorkload 1:Participant 1:1.40+.81+.60+.67+.69 = 4.17 LParticipant 2:.30+.22+.18+.25+.33 = 1.28 LWorkload 2:Participant 1:1.88+1.15+.91+.80+.66 = 5.4 LParticipant 2:1.82+.86+.54+.45+.53 = 4.2 LOxygen cost of steady state exercise: Steady rate VO2 * length of exercise:Workload 1:Participant 1:2.25*5 = 11.25 LParticipant 2:.46*5 = 2.3 LWorkload 2:Participant 1:2.96 * 5 = 14.8 LParticipant 2:1.8* 5 = 9 LOxygen deficit: subtract total exercise oxygen consumption from the oxygen cost of steady state exerciseWorkload 1:Participant 1:11.25-9.81 = 1.44 LParticipant 2:2.3 – 2.36 = -.06 LWorkload 2:Participant 1:14.8 – 13.11 = 4.69 LParticipant 2:9 – 7.93 = 1.07 LEPOC: subtract the resting oxygen cost from the actual total post exercise VO2Workload 1:Participant 1:4.17-2.12 = 2.05 LParticipant 2:1.28-.53 = .75 LWorkload 2:Participant 1:5.4 – 2.12 = 3.28 LParticipant 2:4.2 - .53 = 3.67 LEnergy liberated at rest: Baseline VO2 * 5 kcal/1 O2 * 5 minParticipant 1:.424 * 5 * 5 = 10.6 kcalParticipant 2:.106 * 5 * 5 = 2.65 kcalEnergy liberated at exercise: Steady rate VO2 * 5 kcal/1 O2 * 5 minWorkload 1:Participant 1:2.25 * 5 * 5 = 56.25 kcalParticipant 2:.46 * 5 * 5 = 11.5 kcalWorkload 2:Participant 1:2.96 * 5 * 5 = 74 kcalParticipant 2:1.80 * 5 * 5 = 45 kcalGross economy: steady rate VO2 / steady rate power Workload 1:Participant 1:2.25 / 60 Watts = .0357 l/WattParticipant 2:.46 / 60 = .00767 l/WattWorkload 2:Participant 1:2.96 / 120 = .0246 l/WattParticipant 2:1.80/ 120 = .015 l/WattNet economy: subtract resting VO2 from steady rate VO2 and divide by steady rate workWorkload 1:Participant 1:(2.25 - .424)/60 = .0304 l/WattParticipant 2:(.46 - .106 )/60 = .0059 l/WattWorkload 2:Participant 1:(2.96 - .424)/120 = .021 l/WattParticipant 2:(1.80 - .106)/120 = .014 l/WattNet Caloric Expenditure for 5min of Exercise (kcal)Workload 1Participant 156.25 kcal - 10.6 kcal = 45.65 kcalParticipant 211.5 kcal - 2.65 kcal = 8.85 kcalWorkload 2Participant 174 - 10.6 kcal = 63.4 kcalParticipant 245 - 2.65 kcal = 42.35 kcalDISCUSSIONThe oxygen consumption differences between workload 1 and 2 were significantly different for participant 2. Because there was an error during the lab, participant 1 performed at a higher resistance on the first workload than she was supposed to. This led to her oxygen consumption for both workloads to be fairly similar. The difference between participant 2’s oxygen consumption was an increase of 1.34 l/min. These potential differences for participant 2 can be explained by the fact that the intensity of the exercise increased during the second workload. This increases the oxygenrequired by the body in order to achieve the desired intensity. The oxygen deficit and EPOCs between workloads were significantly different for both participants. The difference in oxygen deficit can signify how fit a participant is as well as how difficult the exercise is. A higher oxygen deficit would signify that the exercise was more challenging. A low oxygen deficit for a particular person may indicate that they are more physically fit. The oxygen deficit was greater for the second workload as it was a moreintense workload, requiring 120 Watts instead of 60 Watts. Similarly, EPOC was generally greater for workload 2 than workload 1. This can be attributed to the fact that the participants were working harder and therefore used more oxygen stores in the body. When they finished the exercise they needed more oxygen to reach their regular level of oxygen in the blood. EPOC for both workloads was greater than the oxygen deficit. Because the body needs to take in oxygen quickly to keep up with the demand during exercise, it is more efficient to intake more oxygen at a faster rate and decrease the oxygen deficit. The more physically fit a person is they will be more efficient at taking in oxygen. EPOC is a less urgent activity, the body can take more time to refill oxygen stores because there is no longer a high demand for it.Due to the brevity of the lab, it is difficult to


View Full Document

UMass Amherst KIN 470 - kin 470 lab report 2; 2.28.14

Download kin 470 lab report 2; 2.28.14
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view kin 470 lab report 2; 2.28.14 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view kin 470 lab report 2; 2.28.14 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?