The effect of somatotype on indirect assessment of aerobic capacity.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the differences in performance of individuals, classified according to Heath-Carter anthropometric somatotype ratings, on the YMCA bicycle ergometer test, 1.5-mile endurance run and the Queens College step test. Heath-Carter anthropometric somatotypes were determined for 141 male college students who were enrolled in a required physical education course at Emporia State University. A sample (n-60) of 15 endotypes, 30 mesotypes, and 15 ectotypes, representing the proportion of individuals classified in each somatogroup of the subject pool (n-14l), was randomly selected. All subjects in the sample were evaluated in terms of their performance on the YMCA bicycle ergometer test, 1.5-mile endurance run and Queens College step test. These indirect tests of aerobic capacity were used to obtain estimates of max V0(ml/kg/min) for each subject in 2 the sample. A fixed effects model of ANOVA showed significant differences to exist within the data base for the main effects of somatotype and aerobic capacity. The interaction term was found to be insignificant. Therefore, the main effects were interpreted. A Tukey post-hoc analysis was used to clarify ANOVA results. From the Tukey analysis t it was determined that significant differences existed between the grand mean values of estimated max V0 2 (ml/kg/min) for the mesotype and endotype somatogroupst and between the grand mean values of estimated max V0(ml/kg/min) for the ectotype 2 and endotype somatogroups, across all tests of aerobic capacity. No significant difference was found to exist between the grand mean values of estimated max V0(ml/kg/min) for the mesotype and ectotype 2 somatogroupst across all tests of aerobic capacity. It was concluded that a high degree of the first component t endomorphYt in one's somatotype appears to be a limiting factor in the performance of selected indirect tests of aerobic capacity. Further Tukey analysis showed significant differences to exist between all of the grand mean values of estimated max V0(ml/kg/min) 2 elicited by the YMCA bicycle ergometer test t 1.5-mile endurance run, and Queens College step test t across all somatogroups. Although significant differences existed between the magnitude of the max V0 2 (ml/kg/min) estimates produced by each indirect test of aerobic capacity, across all somatogroups, the question of which test provides the most effective estimate of max V02 was not addressed. The study does suggest that the Queens College step test tends to produce the most liberal estimates of max V0(ml/kg/min) when compared to the estimates of max 2 V0(ml/kg/min) produced by the 1.S-mile endurance run and the YMCA 2 bicycle ergometer test. The YMCA bicycle ergometer test tends to elicit the most conservative estimates of max V0(ml/kg/min). It was concluded 2 that the indirect aerobic capacity test of choice in a given research or practical application, then, is a function of the philosophy and purpose inherent in the evaluation.