Back

The effects of crank power and cadence on muscle fascicle shortening velocities, muscle activations and joint-powers during cycling.

Riveros-Matthey, C. D.; Carroll, T. J.; Lichtwark, G. A.; Connick, M. J.

2022-07-18 physiology
10.1101/2022.07.17.500375 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Whilst people typically chose to locomote in most economical fashion, during cycling on a bicycle they will, unusually, chose cadences that are higher than metabolically optimal. Empirical measurements of the intrinsic contractile properties of the vastus lateralis (VL) muscle during submaximal cycling suggest that the cadences that people prefer (i.e., self-selected cadences: SSC) allow for optimal muscle fascicle shortening velocity for the production of knee extensor muscle power. It remains unclear, however, whether this is consistent across different power outputs where SSC is known to might be affected. We examined the effect of cadence and external power requirements on muscle neuromechanics and joint powers during cycling. VL fascicle shortening velocities, muscle activations and joint-specific powers were measured during cycling between 60 and 120rpm (and the SSC), while participants produced 10%, 30%, and 50% of peak maximal power. VL shortening velocity increased as cadence increased but was similar across the different power outputs. Although no differences were found in the distribution of joint powers across cadence conditions, the absolute knee joint power increased with increasing crank power output. Muscle fascicle shortening velocities increase in VL at the SSC as pedal power demands increase from submaximal to maximal cycling. It therefore seems highly unlikely that preferred cadence is primarily driven by the desire to maintain "optimal" muscle fascicle shortening velocities. A secondary analysis of muscle activation patterns revealed that minimizing muscle activation is likely more important when choosing a cadence for given pedal power demand.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Experimental Biology
249 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
37.3%
2
European Journal of Applied Physiology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.2%
3
Journal of Applied Physiology
29 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
50% of probability mass above
4
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
4.3%
5
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 36%
3.9%
6
The Journal of Physiology
134 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.8%
7
Experimental Physiology
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
8
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.0%
9
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 46%
2.6%
10
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
11
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.4%
12
Journal of Biomechanics
57 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.1%
13
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
14
Physiological Reports
35 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.6%
15
Biology Open
130 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
16
American Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and Metabolism
34 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.2%
17
Human Movement Science
13 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
18
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
19
Function
15 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
20
Integrative Organismal Biology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
21
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
88 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%
22
Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%