| Title |
Influence of acute dietary nitrate supplementation on 50 mile time trial performance in well-trained cyclists
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Applied Physiology, April 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00421-012-2397-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daryl P. Wilkerson, Giles M. Hayward, Stephen J. Bailey, Anni Vanhatalo, Jamie R. Blackwell, Andrew M. Jones |
| Abstract |
Dietary nitrate supplementation has been reported to improve short distance time trial (TT) performance by 1-3 % in club-level cyclists. It is not known if these ergogenic effects persist in longer endurance events or if dietary nitrate supplementation can enhance performance to the same extent in better trained individuals. Eight well-trained male cyclists performed two laboratory-based 50 mile TTs: (1) 2.5 h after consuming 0.5 L of nitrate-rich beetroot juice (BR) and (2) 2.5 h after consuming 0.5 L of nitrate-depleted BR as a placebo (PL). BR significantly elevated plasma [NO(2) (-)] (BR: 472 ± 96 vs. PL: 379 ± 94 nM; P < 0.05) and reduced completion time for the 50 mile TT by 0.8 % (BR: 136.7 ± 5.6 vs. PL: 137.9 ± 6.4 min), which was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). There was a significant correlation between the increased post-beverage plasma [NO(2) (-)] with BR and the reduction in TT completion time (r = -0.83, P = 0.01). Power output (PO) was not different between the conditions at any point (P > 0.05) but oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text]O(2)) tended to be lower in BR (P = 0.06), resulting in a significantly greater PO/[Formula: see text]O(2) ratio (BR: 67.4 ± 5.5 vs. PL: 65.3 ± 4.8 W L min(-1); P < 0.05). In conclusion, acute dietary supplementation with beetroot juice did not significantly improve 50 mile TT performance in well-trained cyclists. It is possible that the better training status of the cyclists in this study might reduce the physiological and performance response to NO(3) (-) supplementation compared with the moderately trained cyclists tested in earlier studies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 44 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 9 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 9 | 20% |
| United States | 9 | 20% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 5% |
| Spain | 2 | 5% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Guyana | 1 | 2% |
| Ireland | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 27 | 61% |
| Scientists | 10 | 23% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 336 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 1% |
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 328 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 85 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 77 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 38 | 11% |
| Researcher | 17 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 4% |
| Other | 43 | 13% |
| Unknown | 64 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 147 | 44% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 30 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 26 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 27 | 8% |
| Unknown | 77 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 46. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 July 2018.
All research outputs
#925,724
of 25,853,983 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#270
of 4,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,399
of 174,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#3
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,853,983 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,402 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 174,781 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.