The Metabolic Relevance of Type of Locomotion in Anaerobic Testing: Bosco Continuous Jumping Test Versus Wingate Anaerobic Test of the Same Duration

Purpose: To evaluate the metabolic relevance of type of locomotion in anaerobic testing by analyzing and comparing the metabolic profile of the Bosco Continuous Jumping Test (CJ30) with the corresponding profile of the Wingate Anaerobic Test (WAnT). Methods: A total of 11 well-trained, male team-sport athletes (age = 23.7 [2.2] y, height = 184.1 [2.8] cm, weight = 82.4 [6.4] kg) completed a CJ30 and WAnT each. During the WAnT, power data and revolutions per minute were recorded, and during the CJ30, jump height and jumping frequency were recorded. In addition, oxygen uptake and blood lactate concentration were assessed, and metabolic profiles were determined via the PCr-LA-O2 method. Results: In the CJ30, metabolic energy was lower (109.3 [18.0] vs 143.0 [13.1] kJ, P < .001, d = −2.302), while peak power (24.8 [4.4] vs 11.8 [0.5] W·kg−1, P < .001, d = 3.59) and mean power (20.8 [3.6] vs 9.1 [0.5] W·kg−1, P < .001, d = 4.14) were higher than in the WAnT. The metabolic profiles of the CJ30 (aerobic energy = 20.00% [4.7%], anaerobic alactic energy [WPCr] = 45.6% [4.5%], anaerobic lactic energy = 34.4% [5.2%]) and the WAnT (aerobic energy = 16.0% [3.0%], anaerobic alactic WPCr = 34.5% [5.0%], anaerobic lactic energy = 49.5% [3.3%]) are highly anaerobic. Absolute energy contribution for the CJ30 and WAnT was equal in WPCr (49.9 [11.1] vs 50.2 [11.2] kJ), but anaerobic lactic energy (37.7 [7.7] vs 69.9 [5.3] kJ) and aerobic energy (20.6 [5.7] vs 23.0 [4.0] kJ) were higher in the WAnT. Mechanical efficiency was substantially higher in the CJ30 (37.9% [4.5%] vs 15.6% [1.0%], P < .001, d = 6.86), while the fatigue index was lower (18.5% [3.8%] vs 23.2% [3.1%], P < .001, d = −1.38) than in the WAnT. Conclusions: Although the anaerobic share in both tests is similar and predominant, the CJ30 primarily taxes the WPCr system, while the WAnT more strongly relies on the glycolytic pathway. Thus, the 2 tests should not be used interchangeably, and the type of locomotion seems crucial when choosing an anaerobic test for a specific sport.

Low Technological Biological Treatment of Source Separated Waste in a Biocell

In 2009 the Norwegian government banned biodegradable waste in landfills to mitigate climate gas production. To be able to stabilize source separated waste before landfilling a constructed biocell has been tested during a four year period. The research is part of a pilot project organized by Avfall Norge. A total amount of 12 000 tons of waste from both industry and households were embedded in the biocell. Before loading, the waste fractions were characterized both in macro and micro scale. Anaerobic testing in lab scale documented the methane potential in different waste fractions. Especially car fluff contained toxic components which suppressed biodegradation. To avoid greenhouse gas leakage the biocell was constructed as a closed system with synthetic capping and gas wells coupled to a compressor. While the biogas was flared the leachate was collected and recycled. Leachate contains both nutrients and DOC which is supposed to increase the biological activity. During the first part of the test period the BOD/COD was above 0.5 before it declined. In addition both inorganic and organic environmental harmful components were analyzed in the leachate. Levels of heavy metal decreased during treatment. The methane production was detected on-line with IR. Both the production and gas phase concentration varied during the test period. A total of five gas wells were positioned at different levels in the biocell. Only one of them produced biogas for a considerable period. This presentation will focus on biocell construction and waste degradation related to variation in leachate constituents as a function of time.

Vertical jump as a tool in assessment of muscular power and anaerobic performance

Muscular strength and anaerobic power could be assessed by single and multiple vertical jump testing procedures. Anaerobic capacity measured by vertical jump testing is highly correlative with athletic performance, as compared to other anaerobic testing procedures. The most frequently used protocol with contact mat or force platform consists of single jump (i.e. squat jump, drop jump, countermovement jump) and serial jump testing with different duration. Measured variables include jump height and duration along with absolute and relative peak muscular power. Several investigators have clearly shown superior jump performance variables in elite athletes as compared to non-elite subjects. Differences obtained could be due to genetic factors and acute or prolonged efects of training regimen.