To install StudyMoose App tap and then “Add to Home Screen”
Save to my list
Remove from my list
The Wingate Test is a commonly used method for assessing anaerobic power and capacity in the lower extremities of the body.
This lab report presents the results of a Wingate Test conducted on two female subjects and examines the relationship between physical activity levels, demographic factors, and performance outcomes. The report discusses the methods used, presents the results in tables, and offers a detailed analysis of the findings. The study concludes that physical activity levels and physiological differences play significant roles in determining the performance outcomes of the Wingate Test.
The Wingate Test is a widely recognized test for assessing anaerobic power and capacity in the lower extremities of the body. It involves cycling at maximum effort for 30 seconds on a cycle ergometer. Anaerobic power and capacity are crucial components in sports that require short-duration maximal efforts. Peak power, determined by the highest number of revolutions achieved in 5 seconds, reflects muscular strength and speed, while anaerobic capacity, or average power, is calculated based on the total number of revolutions averaged over the 30 seconds.
Verified writer
Proficient in: Physics
5 (876)
“ Have been using her for a while and please believe when I tell you, she never fail. Thanks Writer Lyla you are indeed awesome ”
The difference in power output is recorded as the Fatigue Index (FI), which is inversely related to peak power (Zepan et al., 2009).
The study included two female subjects, Subject 1 and Subject 2, whose demographics are presented in Table 1. The subjects performed the Wingate Test on a cycle ergometer. The test involved cycling at maximum effort for 30 seconds, with data collected in 5-second intervals, as shown in Table 2.
The absolute peak power (W) was calculated using the formula:
Absolute peak power (W) = [Force Setting (kg) × 9.8067 × Number of Revolutions × 6m] / Time (seconds)
The relative peak power (W• kg-1) was determined by:
Relative peak power (W• kg-1) = Absolute peak power (W) / Body Weight (kg)
The absolute mean power (W) was calculated using:
Absolute mean power (W) = Total Work (J) / Time (seconds)
The relative mean power (W• kg-1) was determined by:
Relative mean power (W• kg-1) = Absolute mean power (W) / Body Weight (kg)
The Fatigue Index (FI) was calculated as:
FI (%) = [Highest Power (W) – Lowest Power (W)] / Highest Power (W)
| Subject | Gender | Age | Height (meters) | Weight (kilograms) | Force FITT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subject 1 | Female | 23 | 1.73 | 67.15 | 5 (3-4 times/week, moderate-high, 45-60 minutes, Sprinting & lacrosse) |
| Subject 2 | Female | 20 | 1.64 | 59.82 | 4 (3 Times/Week, Moderate, 15-30 Minutes, Aerobic & Abdominals) |
| Time interval (seconds) | Number of revolutions | Subject 1 | Subject 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0-5 | 10 | 7 | 10 |
| 5-10 | 10 | 9 | 10 |
| 10-15 | 9 | 8 | 9 |
| 15-20 | 7 | 6 | 7 |
| 20-25 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| 25-30 | 6 | 5 | 6 |
| Subject | Absolute peak power (W) | Relative peak power (W• kg-1) | Absolute mean power (W) | Relative mean power (W• kg-1) | FI (%) | Classification of relative powers | Classification of FI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subject 1 | 588 | 8.76 | 470.4 | 7 | 40 | Peak- Above Average | Average |
| Subject 2 | 432 | 7.22 | 328 | 5.5 | 44 | Peak- Average | Below Average |
The Wingate Test is a valuable tool for assessing anaerobic power and capacity, particularly in sports that require short bursts of maximal effort.
The results of this study show a significant difference in performance outcomes between the two subjects, which can be attributed to various factors.
Both absolute and relative measurements of peak and mean power were analyzed in this study. Relative measurements take into account individual differences, such as body weight, allowing for a fair comparison between subjects. Subject 1 displayed higher absolute and relative peak and mean powers compared to Subject 2. This suggests that Subject 1 had greater muscular strength and speed during the Wingate Test. The classification of relative powers further confirms Subject 1's above-average performance, while Subject 2's relative mean power fell below average.
Physical activity levels, as indicated by the FITT (Frequency, Intensity, Time, Type) data, played a significant role in the performance outcomes. Subject 1, who reported a higher level of physical activity, performed better on the Wingate Test. This aligns with the initial hypothesis that more active subjects would achieve higher mean anaerobic power. However, it's important to consider other factors such as age, height, and weight.
Subject 1 was three years older, slightly taller, and approximately 8 kilograms heavier than Subject 2. These physical differences may have contributed to Subject 1's superior performance. Experience and overall body size can influence anaerobic power and capacity (Nies & Kershaw, 2004).
Physiological differences also played a role in the varying fatigue indices observed in this study. Fast-twitch muscle fibers are known to contribute to peak power in activities like the Wingate Test. Subjects with more than 50% fast-twitch muscle fibers tend to reach their maximal power at a higher cycling cadence than those with fewer fast-twitch fibers (Vandewalle et al., 1987). The higher total number of revolutions achieved by Subject 1 suggests a potential dominance of fast-twitch muscle fibers.
One limitation of this study is the lack of consideration for the inertia of the cycle ergometer, which can affect power measurements. Additionally, the timing of the test sessions in the morning with minimal warm-up may not have fully reflected the subjects' performance potential. Extrinsic motivation, such as competition and encouragement, was lacking in the laboratory setting, which can influence performance outcomes.
The Wingate Test is a valuable tool for assessing anaerobic power and capacity in the lower extremities. This study demonstrated that physical activity levels, physiological differences, and demographic factors influence performance outcomes in the Wingate Test. Subject 1, who was more physically active and had certain physical advantages, achieved superior results compared to Subject 2. Future research should explore additional factors that may impact Wingate Test performance to provide a comprehensive understanding of anaerobic power and capacity.
Beneke, R., Pollman, C., Blief, I., Leithauser, R. M., & M., H. (2002). How anaerobic is the Wingate Anaerobic Test for humans? European Journal of Applied Physiology, 87(4-5), 388-392.
Dotan, R., & Bar-Or, O. (1980). Climatic heat stress and performance in the Wingate Anaerobic Test. European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology, 44(3), 237-243.
Nies, M. A., & Kershaw, T. C. (2004). Psychosocial and Environmental Influences on Physical Activity and Health Outcomes in Sedentary Women. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 34(3), 243-249.
Smith, J. C., & Hill, D. W. (1991). Contribution of energy systems during a Wingate power test. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 25(4), 196-199.
Vandewalle, H., Pérès, G., & Monod, H. (1987). Standard Anaerobic Exercise Tests. Sports Medicine, 4(4), 268-289.
Zupan, M. F., Arata, A. W., Dawson, L. H., Wile, A. L., Payn, T. L., & Hannon, M. E. (2009). Wingate Anaerobic Test Peak Power and Anaerobic Capacity Classifications for Men and Women Intercollegiate Athletes. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 23(9), 2598-2604.
Wingate Test Laboratory Report. (2024, Jan 05). Retrieved from https://studymoose.com/document/wingate-test-laboratory-report
👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!
Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.
get help with your assignment
