Normal Physiological Characteristics of Elite Swimmers · 2017-09-27 · Normal Physiological Characteristics of Elite Swimmers Gregory D. Wells The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto

30

Pediatric Exercise Science, 2006, 17, 30-52© 2006 Human Kinetics, Inc.

Wells and Schneiderman-Walker are with the Department of Lung Biology at The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Plyley is with the Faculty of Applied Health Sciences at Brock University, St. Catharineʼs, Ontario, Canada.

Normal Physiological Characteristicsof Elite Swimmers

Gregory D. WellsThe Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto

Jane Schneiderman-WalkerThe Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto

Michael PlyleyBrock University

The purpose of this research was to develop a comprehensive normative database of the physiological characteristics of elite swimmers. Data were obtained from 195 elite swimmers (89 males and 106 females) ages 12 to 18 years. Six protocols were used to measure variables in the following categories: descriptive charac-teristics, cardiovascular, respiratory, strength and power, body composition, and anthropometry. Signifi cant effects of gender and age were identifi ed for a number of variables. These data could be used for the physiological assessment and talent identifi cation of swimmers in comparison with other populations.

Swimming performance depends on optimizing propulsion and minimizing the opposing factor—drag (6,10). Factors that contribute to maximizing propulsion include aerobic and anaerobic energetics (48,7,8), muscular power (20), muscular endurance (53), and stroke technique (9,10,11). Factors related to minimizing drag include the anthropometric characteristics and body composition (42). Swimmers ̓physical characteristics have been examined to determine the characteristics of suc-cessful sprint and endurance swimmers (17,27,29,32,41,43,56) in order to assess the relative importance of specifi c characteristics to performance (11,40,44) and to evaluate changes in physical characteristics over time (4,14,21,24,32,35,38,50,51,52,57). Although research into the physiology of swimmers is substantial, few studies to date have examined these physiological characteristics over an extended time period or examined an extensive set of variables from a range of physiological systems. In addition, none have included a comprehensive participant cohort com-prised of males and females across all swimming disciplines or a wide age range.

04Wells(30) 30 1/31/06, 9:36:42 AM

Characteristics of Elite Swimmers 31

A normative database could be used to evaluate an athleteʼs health, training, and performance status by providing: a) a means by which the athlete could be monitored cross-sectionally in relation to world-class performers (37) and b) a means of tracking improvements in function or physical development over time (5,43). Smith et al. (43) supported the importance of developing such a database by suggesting that a successful monitoring program is necessary to both identify and treat weaknesses. Because optimal training adaptation involves balancing adap-tive overload and over training, a successful monitoring program would ensure that the many hours spent in the water developing swimmers could be spent most effi ciently. The overstress study conducted by Hooper et al. (23) also points out the importance of a regular monitoring program in evaluating the status of athletes during training.

Therefore, the objective of this research was to establish comprehensive norma-tive physiological data for male and female elite competitive swimmers from 12 to 18 years of age. The elite swimmers that were used in this research were members of the Canadian National or Youth National Teams during the study period. To qualify for the Youth National Team, participants must have been ranked 1st in Canada in their respective events for their age (12–15 years). To qualify for the National Team, athletes must have achieved an absolute ranking of top 2 perfor-mances in Canada for a given event in that calendar year. As a result of the fact that some athletes qualifi ed for the Canadian Teams on multiple occasions (as few as once and as many as four times for some athletes), this study used a research design that included both cross-sectional and longitudinal elements to examine the physiological characteristics of elite swimmers across genders and over the age range studied.

Methods

Participants

Study participants included 195 competitive swimmers (89 males and 106 females) between the ages of 12 and 18 who were members of the Canadian National and Youth National Teams. The sample included 32 distance (14 males, 18 females), 68 middle distance (33 males, 35 females), and 95 (42 male, 53 female) sprint swimmers. Distance swimmers were those athletes who specialized in events 800 m or longer, middle-distance swimmers specialized in events 200 and 400 m in length, and sprinters specialized in events 50 or 100 m in length. Informed consent was obtained from each participant in accordance with the policy of the University of Toronto Ethics Board. Data were collected during biannual Youth National and National Team training camps over an 8-year period. The participants were tested approximately every 6 months for a period that depended on the length of time they remained as National or Youth National team members. In some cases, this meant that a swimmer was evaluated only once, whereas in other cases a swimmer could have been assessed as many as four times. The number of multiple test sessions completed by the participants is shown in Figure 1. A total of 13 testing sessions are included in this database.

04Wells(30) 31 1/31/06, 9:36:44 AM

32 Wells, Schneiderman-Walker, and Plyley

Procedures

The testing consisted of six protocols to measure variables in the following catego-ries of descriptive characteristics: cardiovascular, respiratory, strength and power, body composition, and anthropometry.

Exercise Test Protocol. Participants were instructed to swim face down, main-taining a position over a marked spot on the bottom of the pool while attached to a weight loaded tether system. The appropriate progressive scheduled loading was started (see Table 1) and continued until exhaustion. Expired gases were collected and analyzed throughout the test with a Beckman Metabolic Measurement Cart (Beckman Instruments, Anaheim, CA) and a modifi ed Hans Rudolph valve system. Electrocardiograms were recorded each minute throughout the test with a Hewlett Packard Telemetry system (78100A Telemetry transmitter and 78101A Telemetry receiver) and an EK31 electrocardiogram using a modifi ed lead three-electrode placement. Variables measured during the exercise test included relative aerobic power (ml·kg–1·min–1), absolute aerobic power (L/min–1), peak heart rate (b/min–1), peak ventilation (L/min–1), peak breathing frequency (br/min–1), and peak respira-tory exchange ratio (RER, VCO

2/VO

2).

Blood Analysis, Cardiovascular, and Pulmonary Function Protocols. Par-ticipants were evaluated in a rested (no strenuous activity earlier that day), fasted (12 hrs) state. Blood samples were collected from the median cubital vein into a 100 × 13 mm evacuated glass tube containing 0.07 ml of a 15% EDTA (K3)

Figure 1 — Number of multiple test sessions completed by participants.

04Wells(30) 32 1/31/06, 9:36:45 AM


Tab

le 1

Te

ther

ed S

wim

Tes

t L

oad

ing

Pro

toco

l

Est

imat

ed m

axim

um

load

= 6

.00

kgE

stim

ated

max

imum

lo

ad =

6.2

5 kg

Est

imat

ed m

axim

um

load

= 6

.50

kgE

stim

ated

max

imum

lo

ad =

6.7

5 kg

Tim

e (m

in)

Adj

uste

dlo

ad (k

g)W

orkl

oad

(kg)

Adj

uste

dlo

ad (k

g)W

orkl

oad

(kg)

Adj

uste

dlo

ad (k

g)W

orkl

oad

(kg)

Adj

uste

dlo

ad (k

g)W

orkl

oad

(kg)

War

m-u

p0

1.50

1.50

1.50

1.50

1.75

1.75

1.75

1.75

1H

old

1.50

Hol

d1.

50H

old

1.75

Hol

d1.

752

Hol

d1.

50H

old

1.50

Hol

d1.

75H

old

1.75

3H

old

1.50

Hol

d1.

50H

old

1.75

Hol

d1.

754

Hol

d1.

50H

old

1.50

Hol

d1.

75H

old

1.75

Test 0

1.50

3.00

1.75

3.25

1.50

3.25

1.75

3.50

0.5

Hol

d3.

00H

old

3.25

Hol

d3.

25H

old

3.50

10.

753.

750.

754.

000.

7540

00.

754.

251.

50.

504.

250.

504.

500.

754.

750.

755

002

0.50

4.75

0.50

5.00

0.50

5.25

0.50

5.50

2.5

0.25

5.00

0.25

5.25

0.25

5.50

0.25

5.75

30.

255.

250.

255.

500.

255.

750.

256.

003.

50.

255.

500.

255.

750.

256.

000.

256.

254

0.25

5.75

0.25

6.00

0.25

6.25

0.25

6.50

4.5

0.25

6.00

0.25

6.25

0.25

6.50

0.25

6.75

50.

256.

250.

256.

500.

256.

750.

257.

005.

50.

256.

500.

256.

750.

257.

000.

257.

256

0.25

6.75

0.25

7.00

0.25

7.25

0.25

7.50

6.5

0.25

7.00

0.25

7.25

0.25

7.50

0.25

7.75

70.

257.

250.

257.

500.

257.

750.

258.

007.

50.

257.

500.

257.

750.

258.

000.

258.

258

0.25

7.75

0.25

8.00

0.25

8.25

0.25

8.50

8.5

0.25

8.00

0.25

8.25

0.25

8.50

0.25

8.75

04Wells(30) 33 1/31/06, 9:36:48 AM


solution that contained 0.014 mg of potassium sorbate. Hemoglobin values were determined using a calibrated spectrophotometer (Bausch and Lomb, Rochester, NY) and the Hycel procedure (2). Final hemoglobin concentration of the blood sample was recorded in mg/100ml by comparing its absorbance against the absor-bance of the standard Hycel Cvnamethaemoglobin reagent at 540 nm. Hematocrit was determined by collecting blood into three heparinized microhematocrit tubes through capillary action. After centrifuging for 5 min, an MSE Microhematocrit Head and Reader were used to read the tubes individually. Results were recorded as a percentage of the average of the two closest readings. A trained technician used an analog blood pressure cuff to measure resting blood pressure. Pulmonary function was assessed by spirometry according to the procedures suggested by the National Heart and Lung Institute (34).

Strength and Power Protocol. Muscular strength and power were assessed by means of vertical jump, isokinetic movements via a strength assessment appara-tus, and tests on an isokinetic swim bench. The right and left handgrip strength measures were collected only during the Youth National Team camps. Strength was assessed using a handgrip dynamometer in kilograms with the participant in a standing position maintaining a straight arm. Leg power was assessed by vertical jump; the result was recorded as the difference between reach and jump heights in centimeters.

Isokinetic strength was measured using a Cybex Multi-Joint Evaluation System (Cybex International, Medway, MA) to assess the individual muscle(s) involved in swimming specifi c movement patterns. The movements tested were in the active propulsion phase of stroke, contributed to a major percentage of stroke power, and were consistent with the range of motion that provides the propulsion. Thus, we chose to examine shoulder internal rotation, elbow extension, and knee extension at a movement speed of 180 degrees/s because this provides a close approximation to true swimming movements and speed. The peak torque value from the best of three maximal trials was used for analysis.

A Biokinetic Swim Bench (Biokinetics Inc., Albany, CA) was used to assess stroke-specifi c power and endurance. Athletes assumed a prone position on the swim bench with their arms extended forward grasping the hand paddles. To determine power, participants were asked, upon command, to make one maximal arm pull in which the sweeping motion mimicked their arm pull in their primary swimming stroke. Athletes used their primary competitive strokes for the test. The peak power output (W) was recorded and used for subsequent analysis. The best of three efforts (highest recorded peak) was used for subsequent analysis. Endurance was assessed by having participants use their specialty stroke to perform 4 min of maximal exercise on the swim bench. The total work output (J) was recorded and used for subsequent analysis.

Anthropometry Protocol. Standing height to the nearest 0.2 m was assessed by using a Health-O-Meter weighing scale (Health-O-Meter 400S, Sunbeam Products Inc., Boca Raton, FL) with a vertical measuring rod. Mass was assessed to the nearest 0.5 kg with the same Health-O-Meter scale. A measuring tape was used to assess girths on the right side of the body to the nearest millimeter. Chest girth was measured at the level of the nipples for males and immediately distal to the

04Wells(30) 34 1/31/06, 9:36:50 AM


breasts (i.e., bra strap line) for females. Forearm girth was measured at the maxi-mum circumference immediately distal to the elbow joint with the participantʼs arm hanging freely. Upper arm girth was measured at the maximum circumference distal to the shoulder joint with the participantʼs arm hanging freely. Flexed upper arm girth was measured at the point of maximum girth with the participantʼs arm fl exed to 90 degrees. Gluteal girth was measured at the level of maximum girth with the participant standing. Thigh girth was measured just below the gluteal furrow at the maximal girth with the participant standing. Calf girth was measured at the level of maximum girth with the participant standing.

Limb length variables included: a) forearm and hand length, measured as the length from the olecranon process of the ulna to the ulnar styloid; b) total arm, measured as the length from the greater tuberosity of the humerus to the ulnar styloid with the elbow fully extended; c) shank and foot, with the participant in standing position, measured as the length from the lateral femoral condyle to the level of the medial malleolus on the lateral side of the leg; and d) total leg, with the participant in standing position, measured as the length from the greater trochanter of the femur to the level of the medial malleolus on the lateral side of the leg.

A Harpenden skinfold caliper (British Indicators, St Albans, Hertfordshire, UK) was used to collect skinfold measurements to the nearest 0.2 mm two seconds after the full pressure of the caliper jaws had been applied; the skinfold value was taken as the average of 2 skinfold measurements separated by at least 1 min to avoid tissue compression. The triceps skinfold was measured on the back of the unclothed pendant right arm at a level midway between the tip of the acromion and the elbow. The biceps skinfold was measured on the ventral side of the right pendant upper arm (over the biceps) at a level midway between the acromion and the olecranon process of the ulna. The subscapular skinfold was measured about 1 cm below the lower (inferior) angle of the right scapula. The suprailiac skinfold was measured 3 cm above the suprailac crest with the fold running diagonally to the crest. Body fat calculations were performed according to the recommendations of Durnin and Wormersley (17).

The joint breadth measures were collected only during the Youth National Team camps. These measures were also collected by using a sliding caliper. Bi-iliac breadth was measured across the iliac crests for maximum diameter. Bi-acromial breadth was measured with the arms of the caliper on the outside of the acromial processes of the shoulders. Femur epicondylar breadth was measured while the participants were sitting on a table with their knees bent at right angles. The width across the outermost parts of the lower end of the femur was recorded. Humerus epicondylar breadth was measured across the outermost parts of the lower end of the humerus.

Statistical Analyses. Results were grouped according to age and gender and were expressed as mean (± SEM). A two-factor analysis of variance was used to evaluate the main effects of gender and age using a general linear model. Results were tested for interaction effects (Gender × Age), and if no interaction effects were noted, then the results were grouped accordingly for post-hoc analysis. A Tukey test was used for post-hoc analysis if differences were observed in any of the conditions. Statistical signifi cance was considered to be p < .05.

04Wells(30) 35 1/31/06, 9:36:52 AM


Results

Descriptive Characteristics

Descriptive characteristics are shown in Table 2. The analysis revealed a signifi cant gender effect, with males having higher relative and absolute maximal aerobic power (p < .001), height (p < .001), and mass (p < .001) than females at all ages except mass at 13 years old. Relative maximal aerobic power was unchanged with age (p = .92), but absolute aerobic power (p < .001), height (p < .001), and mass (p < .001) all showed signifi cant increases with age. Interaction effects were found for absolute maximal aerobic power (p = .003), mass (p = .001), and height (p < = .001).

Cardiovascular Function

No interaction effects were noted for cardiovascular function variables; therefore, all results were grouped by age and gender for analysis. Males were observed to have higher hemoglobin and hematocrit levels (p < .001), a lower maximum heart rate (p = .037), and lower diastolic (p = .004) and systolic blood pressures (p = .016) than female participants. Age had an effect (a decrease) on maximum heart rate (p < .001), hematocrit levels (p = .014), and on diastolic blood pressure (p = .049) but not on hemoglobin and or systolic blood pressure. Results are shown in Table 3.

Respiratory Function

No interaction effects were noted for respiratory function variables, so all results were grouped by age and gender for analysis (see Table 4). Males had higher maxi-mal ventilation values (p < .001) and lower maximal breathing frequency values (p = .017) than did the female participants. There was no difference between males and females in maximal RER at the end of the exercise test. Pulmonary function testing revealed that males had higher residual volume (p = .019) and higher forced vital capacity (p < .001) than did female participants. Age had an effect (an increase) on maximum ventilation (p = .028), residual volume (p < .001), and forced vital capacity (p < .001), but not on RER or maximal breathing frequency.

Strength and Power

Males had higher grip strength (p = < .001), vertical jump (p = < .001), elbow extension (p = < 0.001), knee extension (p = < .001), stroke-specifi c power (p = .005), and nearly signifi cant stroke-specifi c endurance (p = .08) than did females (see Table 5). Right grip strength (p = < .001), elbow extension (p = .004), and knee extension (p = < .001) increased with age, but shoulder internal rotation (p = .125) and vertical jump (p = .065) did not, although the vertical jump results approached signifi cance. Interaction effects were noted for vertical jump (p = < .001) and knee extension (p = .007). The results from the swim-bench testing indicated that stroke-specifi c power (p = .474) and stroke-specifi c endurance (p = .363) did not change with age.

04Wells(30) 36 1/31/06, 9:36:54 AM


Tab

le 2

D

escr

ipti

ve V

aria

ble

s: M

ean

± S

D (

n)

Age

Gen

der

Max

. aer

obic

pow

er (r

elat

ive)

:m

l·kg–1

·min

–1

Max

. aer

obic

pow

er (a

bsol

ute)

:L/

min

Hei

ght:

cm

Mas

s: k

g

12Fe

mal

e 5

0.1

± 5.

0 (7

)

2.7

± 0.

4 (7

)00

163.

3 ±

7.5

(12)

00

53.2

± 6

.8 (

12)0

0000

013

Mal

e

56.2

± 6

.6 (

13)a

3

.2 ±

0.5

(13

)a 016

8.2

± 7.

7 (1

6)a 0

058

.1 ±

9.3

(16

)000

000

Fem

ale

49

.9 ±

5.3

9 (3

4)

2.7

± 0.

3 (3

4)0

164.

6 ±

6.1

(44)

00

54

.9 ±

6.3

(44

)000

000

14M

ale

57

.6 ±

4.9

(25

)a

3.

6 ±

0.5

(25)

a *13

174.

2 ±

5.9

(37)

a *13

63.9

± 7

.2 (

37)a *

13 0

00Fe

mal

e 4

8.8

± 3.

9 (2

6) 2

.8 ±

0.3

(26

) 1

68.4

± 4

.9 (

31)0

0058

.6 ±

6.7

(31

)000

000

15M

ale

56

.8 ±

5.3

(42

)a

3.

7 ±

0.4

(42)

a *13

176.

9 ±

5.7

(54)

a *13

65.8

± 6

.5 (

54)a *

13 0

00Fe

mal

e

50.8

± 5

.7 (

34)

2.9

± 0

.4 (

34)

167

.3 ±

5.3

(48

)000

58.6

± 6

.4 (

48)0

0000

0

16M

ale

55

.2 ±

3.0

(12

)a

3.7

± 0

.4 (

12)a *

1317

7.8

± 6.

0 (1

5)a *

1367

.5 ±

6.2

(15

)a *13

000

Fem

ale

52

.7 ±

3.7

(13

)

3.

1 ±

0.2

(13)

*12,1

3 1

68.0

± 3

.7 (

17)0

0060

.5 ±

3.9

(17

)*12

,13 00

17M

ale

57

.7 ±

3.4

(11

)a

4.

3 ±

0.3

(11)

a *13

,14,

15,

16

180.

6 ±

7.3

(18)

a *13

,14

75.

6 ±

7.4

(19)

a *13

,14,

15,1

6

Fem

ale

49

.3 ±

4.7

(12

)

3

.1 ±

0.3

(12

)*12

,13

166

.4 ±

5.0

(21

)000

61.2

± 4

.9 (

21)*

12,1

3 00

18M

ale

55.

1 ±

5.1

(8)a

4

.2 ±

0.5

(8)

a *13

,14,

15,

16

184.

0 ±

7.9

(8)a *

13,1

4,15

77.6

± 7

.5 (

8)a *

13,1

4,15

,16

Fem

ale

50.8

± 4

.5 (

4)

3.

3 ±

0.6

(4)*

12,1

3 1

69.2

± 4

.8 (

11)0

0064

.1 ±

5.9

(11

)*12

,130

000

*Sig

nifi c

antly

(p

< .0

5) h

ighe

r va

lue

com

pare

d w

ith th

e su

pers

crip

ted

age.

a Sig

nifi c

antly

(p

< .0

5) h

ighe

r re

sult

for

mal

es w

hen

com

pare

d w

ith f

emal

es.

04Wells(30) 37 1/31/06, 9:36:56 AM


Tab

le 3

C

ard

iova

scu

lar

Res

ult

s: M

ean

± S

D (

n)

Age

(y

ears

)G

ende

rH

emog

lobi

n(m

g/10

0ml)

Hem

atoc

rit (

%)

Max

imum

hea

rtra

te (b

/min

)S

ysto

lic b

lood

pres

sure

(mm

Hg)

Dia

stol

icbl

ood

pres

sure

(m

mH

g)

12

Fem

ale

13.6

± 0

.6 (

8)42

.3 ±

1.7

(8)

000

19

2.4

± 7.

4 (7

)000

010

5.3

± 6.

9 (6

)61

.6 ±

9.3

(6)

00

13

Mal

e

15.1

± 0

.8 (

13)a

47.1

± 5

.0 (

12)a

0018

3.0

± 9.

6 (1

3) 0

00

115.

8 ±

16.4

(10

)68

.0 ±

6.7

(10

) 0

Fem

ale

13.

5 ±

0.9

(34)

43.1

± 2

.9 (

34)

00

190.

1 ±

8.7

(34)

b 000

113

.1 ±

8.4

(32

)67

.5 ±

8.1

(32

) 0

14

Mal

e 1

4.8

± 0.

9 (2

5)a

46.0

± 2

.1 (

25)a

0018

7.8

± 8.

6 (2

5)0

00

118.

9 ±

10.5

(23

)67

.1 ±

7.0

(23

) 0

Fem

ale

3.

9 ±

0.9

(27)

43.2

± 3

.1 (

27)0

0018

8.7

± 7.

6 (2

6) 0

00

114.

5 ±

11.5

(22

)69

.5 ±

7.9

(22

) 0

15

Mal

e

15.0

± 1

.0 (

43)a

45.9

± 3

.2 (

43)a 0

018

6.9

± 7.

8 (4

2) 0

00

121.

2 ±

8.4

(39)

a69

.2 ±

9.3

(39

)0

Fem

ale

14.

0 ±

1.2

(38)

42.8

± 2

.9 (

38)0

0018

8.6

± 7.

7 (3

4) 0

00

110.

7 ±

11.1

(29

)68

.2 ±

8.4

(29

) 0

16

Mal

e

14.9

± 1

.1 (

13)a

46.2

± 2

.2 (

13)a

00

183.

5 ±

7.2

(12)

000

117

.3 ±

9.7

(13

) 7

3.3

± 8.

2 (1

3)00

Fem

ale

13.

8 ±

1.4

(17)

40.4

± 4

.2 (

17)0

0018

1.6

± 8.

5 (1

3)*12

,13

115.

0 ±

7.5

(9)

67.7

± 8

.2 (

9) 0

0

17

Mal

e

15.1

± 1

.2 (

18)a

43.5

± 3

.3 (

18)0

0017

7.3

± 8.

8 (1

0)*14

,15

120.

7 ±

9.8

(8)

77.

0 ±

4.4

(8)*

140

Fem

ale

13.

3 ±

3.2

(20)

42.4

± 7

.6 (

20)0

0018

3.3

± 9.

9 (1

0) 0

00 1

13.8

± 8

.0 (

10)

72.1

± 6

.4 (

10)

0

18

Mal

e 1

5.4

± 1.

7 (7

)a 4

5.0

± 2.

0 (7

)a 00

017

3.7

± 6.

3 (8

)*14

,15 0

117.

5 ±

3.8

(4)

80.2

± 7

.3 (

4)a *

14

Fem

ale

13.

5 ±

1.3

(10)

38

.6 ±

4.3

(10

)*13

,14,

1517

7.6

± 4.

0 (3

)*12

,13 0

117

.5 ±

16.

4 (4

)

*Sig

nifi c

antly

(p

< .0

5) h

ighe

r va

lue

com

pare

d w

ith th

e su

pers

crip

ted

age.

a Sig

nifi c

antly

(p

< .0

5) h

ighe

r re

sult

for

mal

es w

hen

com

pare

d w

ith f

emal

es; b s

ignifi c

antly

(p

< .0

5) h

ighe

r re

sult

for

fem

ales

whe

n co

mpa

red

with

mal

es.

04Wells(30) 38 1/31/06, 9:36:58 AM


Tab

le 4

R

esp

irat

ory

Res

ult

s: M

ean

± S

D (

n)

Age

Gen

der

Res

idua

lvo

lum

e (L

)Fo

rced

vita

lca

paci

ty (L

)M

ax v

entil

atio

n(L

/min

)

Max

bre

athi

ngfr

eque

ncy

(br/

min

)M

ax R

ER

(V

CO

2/VO

2)

12Fe

mal

e0.

8 ±

0.04

(5)

4.3

± 0.

58 (

8) 0

77

.2 ±

12.

91 (

7)46

.3 ±

5.2

(7)

1.0

5 ±

0.09

(7)

13M

ale

1.0

± 0.

3 (1

1)4.

9 ±

1.1

(8)a 0

0

93.

1 ±

18.1

(8)

a 4

1.0

± 11

.1 (

8) 1

.0 ±

0.1

(8)

Fem

ale

0.8

± 0.

2 (2

3) 4

.2 ±

0.5

(32

) 00

78

.7 ±

13.

3 (3

0) 4

2.4

± 7.

1 (3

0)

1.0

± 0.

1 (3

0)

14M

ale

1.0

± 0.

1 (1

6) 5

.4 ±

0.9

(24

)a 0

10

1.6

± 19

.3 (

24)a

40.

3 ±

8.5

(24)

1.

1 ±

0.1

(24)

Fem

ale

1.0

± 0.

1 (1

8) 4

.6 ±

0.4

(19

) 00

83

.2 ±

13.

1 (1

8) 4

1.9

± 6.

3 (1

8)

1.0

± 0.

1 (1

8)

15M

ale

1.1

± 0.

2 (2

8)5.

6 ±

0.8

(40)

a 0

99.

7 ±

13.3

(40

)a 3

7.1

± 7.

4 (4

0)

1.1

± 0.

1 (4

0)Fe

mal

e1.

0 ±

0.2

(32)

4.6

± 0.

6 (3

2)0

81

.2 ±

17.

8 (3

0)

42.1

± 7

.2 (

29)b

1.

0 ±

0.1

(30)

16M

ale

1.1

± 0.

2 (9

) 05.

5 ±

0.6

(11)

0

99.

7 ±

19.2

(10

)

37.8

± 1

0.4

(10)

1.

1 ±

0.1

(10)

Fem

ale

1.0

± 0.

2 (1

1)5.

0 ±

0.6

(9)

0 8

7.9

± 9.

5 (1

0)43

.8 ±

8.3

(6)

1.

0 ±

0.1

(10)

17M

ale

1.3

± 0.

2 (1

1)

6

.5 ±

0.9

(9)

a *13

,14,

15,1

6 1

13.6

± 1

7.4

(9)a

42.3

± 5

.1 (

6) 1

.0 ±

0.1

(9)

Fem

ale

1.1

± 0.

4 (6

) 05.

0 ±

0.7

(5)0

0 7

2.5

± 10

.5 (

6)45

.9 ±

5.8

(5)

1.0

± 0

.1 (

6)

18M

ale

1.4

± 0.

4 (7

)*13

,14,

15

6

.8 ±

1.2

(6)

a *13

,14,

15,1

6

11

9.8

± 10

.5 (

7)*13

,15

46.3

± 9

.8 (

3) 1

.0 ±

0.1

(7)

Fem

ale

1.2

± 0.

3 (3

) 05.

3 ±

1.1

(2)0

0 9

9.2

± 4.

1 (2

)—

1.1

± 0

.2 (

2)

Not

e. V

CO

2 = v

olum

e of

car

bon

diox

ide;

VO

2 = v

olum

e of

oxy

gen;

br

= n

umbe

r of

bre

aths

.a S

ignifi c

antly

(p

< .0

5) h

ighe

r re

sult

for

mal

es w

hen

com

pare

d w

ith f

emal

es; b s

ignifi c

antly

(p

< .0

5) h

ighe

r re

sult

for

fem

ales

whe

n co

mpa

red

with

mal

es.

*Sig

nifi c

antly

(p

< .0

5) h

ighe

r va

lue

com

pare

d w

ith th

e su

pers

crip

ted

age.

04Wells(30) 39 1/31/06, 9:36:59 AM


Tab

le 5

S

tren

gth

an

d P

ow

er R

esu

lts:

Mea

n ±

SD

(n

)

Age

(yea

rs)

Vari

able

1213

1415

1617

18

Rig

ht g

rip

stre

ngth

(kg

)

m

alea

—39

.2 ±

10.

2 (1

3)a

43.3

± 7

.4

(25)

a47

.1 ±

7.6

(4

1)a *

1350

.2 ±

7.3

(1

1)a *

13,1

452

.0 ±

6.5

(6

)a *13

,14

56.3

± 2

.3

(3)a *

13,1

4

fe

mal

e28

.3 ±

3.6

(8

)29

.7 ±

3.8

(3

5)32

.2 ±

5.3

(2

5)33

.7 ±

4.9

(3

0)33

.4 ±

2.5

(5

)38

.3 ±

3.5

(3

)—

Ver

tical

ju

mp

(cm

)

m

alea

—16

.7 ±

3.1

(1

3)a

17.1

± 1

.9

(25)

a18

.6 ±

2.6

(4

1)a

19.3

± 2

.5

(11)

a20

.5 ±

2.8

(1

8)a *

13,1

419

.1 ±

2.7

(8

)a

fe

mal

e12

.8 ±

1.3

(7

)14

.6 ±

2.3

(3

5)15

.5 ±

2.5

(2

5)14

.9 ±

2.2

(3

5)14

.4 ±

1.8

(1

3)14

.4 ±

2.5

(1

4)13

.7 ±

2.5

(7)

Shou

lder

inte

rnal

ro

tatio

n (N

. m)

m

ale

—29

.3 ±

10.

7 (1

1)28

.9 ±

6.0

(1

2)35

.6 ±

6.9

(1

9)43

.9 ±

13.

2 (4

)39

.2 ±

9.5

(1

5)37

.5 ±

3.2

(5

)

fe

mal

e23

.1 ±

4.6

(4

)24

.9 ±

5.7

(1

6)25

.9 ±

6.4

(1

5)25

.1 ±

4.8

(2

4)28

.4 ±

10.

5 (1

3)29

.7 ±

11.

1 (1

3)32

.9 ±

13.

1 (7

)

04Wells(30) 40 1/31/06, 9:37:01 AM


Elb

ow e

xten

sion

(N

. m)

m

alea

—32

.4 ±

6.

8 (1

1)38

.3 ±

5.5

(1

6)a

42.8

± 9

.2

(30)

a *13

41.5

± 4

.5

(10)

a40

.5 ±

10.

3 (1

6)a

37.4

± 8

.9

(6)

fe

mal

e30

.9 ±

3.6

(5

)26

.9 ±

5.4

(2

4)31

.8 ±

6.8

(2

0)31

.9 ±

8.8

(3

5)29

.1 ±

8.5

(1

5)31

.9 ±

11.

0 (1

3)34

.1 ±

12.

9 (7

)

Kne

e ex

tens

ion

(N. m

)

m

alea

—88

.6 ±

27.

1 (1

3)11

0.5

± 21

.0

(25)

a11

7.7

± 25

.8

(43)

a *13

121.

6 ±

30.2

(1

2)a *

1399

.4 ±

26.

3 (1

6)a

98.1

± 2

9.7

(8)a

fe

mal

e79

.8 ±

10.

7 (7

)83

.4 ±

13.

9 (3

5)94

.9 ±

24.

0 (2

7)85

.9 ±

20.

8 (3

7)76

.4 ±

19.

7 (1

5)73

.7 ±

18.

2 (1

5)*14

71.7

± 2

6.0

(7)

Stro

ke -

spec

ifi c

pow

er: s

wim

be

nch

(W)

m

alea

—31

0 ±

178.

2 (2

)25

3.6

± 10

9.7

(13)

270.

3 ±

113.

9 (2

4)a

319.

2 ±

124.

4 (6

)—

—

fe

mal

e14

2 ±

61.8

(3

)17

1.7

± 75

.2

(19)

172.

6 ±

63.9

(1

1)19

0.4

± 11

5.2

(12)

253.

5 ±

115.

3 (2

)—

—

Stro

ke-

spec

ifi c

endu

ranc

e: s

wim

be

nch

(J)

m

alea

—56

9 ±

140

(2)

1408

.6 ±

839

.4

(13)

1340

.3 ±

693

.1

(24)

1382

.5 ±

781

.3

(6)

——

fe

mal

e35

3.7

± 14

1.6

(3)

791.

9 ±

557.

6 (1

9)65

6.9

± 39

8.5

(11)

924.

3 ±

482.

5 (1

2)95

2.5

± 28

5 (2

)—

—

Not

e. N

= n

ewto

ns; W

= w

atts

; J =

joul

es.

a Sig

nifi c

antly

(p

< .0

5) h

ighe

r re

sult

for

mal

es w

hen

com

pare

d w

ith f

emal

es. b S

ignifi c

antly

(p

< .0

5) h

ighe

r re

sult

for

fem

ales

whe

n co

mpa

red

with

mal

es.

*Sig

nifi c

antly

(p

< .0

5) h

ighe

r va

lue

com

pare

d w

ith th

e su

pers

crip

ted

age.

04Wells(30) 41 1/31/06, 9:37:02 AM


Body Composition

The effect of gender was signifi cant for this set of variables (see Table 6), with the males having a higher body density (p = < .001) and a lower triceps skinfold (p = < .001), biceps skinfold (p = < .001), subscapular skinfold (p = < .001), and suprailiac skinfold (p = .046), as well as a lower body fat percentage (p = < .001) than females. There were no differences between males and females in suprailiac skinfold (p = .24) results. The results from several body composition tests varied signifi cantly with age, including triceps skinfold (p = .012), biceps skinfold (p = .012), and subscapular skinfold (p = < .001). Other variables did not change with age including body density (p = .46), suprailiac skinfold (p = .45), and body fat percentage (p = .30).

Anthropometry

Males had greater inspired and expired chest circumferences (p < .001), upper arm circumferences (p < .001), bi-acromial breadth (p < .001), and epicondylar femur and humerus breadth (p < .001) than the females, but there was no differ-ence between genders in gluteal, calf, or thigh girth or bi-iliac breadth (see Table 7). Age was a signifi cant determinant of inspired and expired chest circumferences (p < .001), upper arm circumferences (p < .001), and gluteal, thigh and calf girths (p < .001), as well as bi-iliac and bi-acromial breadths (p < .001).

DiscussionThe present research establishes normative physiological data for a sample of 195 national-team-level competitive male and female swimmers ranging in age from 12 to 18 years. This data augments the literature on the characteristics of swimmers because it is derived from more comprehensive physiological variables from a larger pool of participants and over a wider range of ages than has been previously reported. The research design that was employed in this study has both cross-sectional and longitudinal elements. As such, the sample therefore contains data on participants who were chosen for the Canadian National and Youth National teams once or on more than one occasion, and in some cases as many as four times. It is important to note that although the study design has limitations, the sample that we have obtained is refl ective of the athletes who were chosen for the Canadian National and National Youth Teams during the study period at each age level. Thus, if the athletes were included in the study on more than one occasion, it is because that athlete was able to achieve the performance level necessary for selection on repeated occasions and thus was the highest ranked Canadian swimmer available for study at that time.

Descriptive Characteristics

Maximal aerobic power is a widely accepted measure of endurance fi tness. Our results for this variable were similar to those from previous studies of maximal exercise testing in swimmers (17). Of note is that aerobic power, once corrected

04Wells(30) 42 1/31/06, 9:37:03 AM


Tab

le 6

B

od

y co

mp

osi

tio

n R

esu

lts:

Mea

n ±

SD

(n

)

Age

(yea

rs)

and

gend

erB

ody

dens

ity

(g·c

m2 )

aTr

icep

s sk

info

ld (m

m)b

Bic

eps

skin

fold

(mm

)bS

ubsc

apul

arsk

info

ld (m

m)b

Sup

raili

ac

skin

fold

(mm

)b

Bod

y co

mpo

sitio

n (b

ody

fat %

)b

12

fem

ale

1.05

5 ±

0.0

(8) 0

10.6

± 3

.0 (

12)

5.7

± 2.

1 (1

2)7.

8 ±

1.6

(12)

8.8

± 2

.3 (

12)

21.

1 ±

3.8

(5)

13m

ale

1.07

2 ±

0.01

(8)

7.6

± 1

.0 (

16)

4.3

± 1.

1 (1

6)6.

6 ±

1.3

(16)

7.9

± 3

.3 (

16)

13.

7 ±

3.1

(11)

fem

ale

1.0

58 ±

0.0

1 (3

2) 9

.8 ±

3.0

(44

)5.

8 ±

1.5

(44)

7.7

± 1.

8 (4

4) 9

.8 ±

3.3

(44

) 1

8.8

± 3.

9 (2

4)14

mal

e 1

.071

± 0

.01

(23)

7.5

± 2

.0 (

37)

4.2

± 1.

0 (3

7)6.

9 ±

1.5

(37)

9.7

± 4

.1 (

37)

13.

2 ±

1.9

(15)

fem

ale

1.0

54 ±

0.0

1 (1

7)11

.2 ±

5.0

(31

)5.

8 ±

2.1

(48)

9.0

± 3.

5 (3

1)10

.5 ±

4.4

(31

) 2

0.0

± 4.

6 (1

8)15

mal

e 1

.072

± 0

.01

(40)

6.6

± 2

.0 (

54)

4.0

± 1.

1 (5

4)6.

9 ±

1.4

(54)

9.1

± 3

.3 (

54)

12.

2 ±

2.1

(27)

fem

ale

1.0

54 ±

0.0

1 (3

2)10

.6 ±

3.0

(48

)5.

7 ±

1.8

(17)

8.4

± 2.

1 (4

8)10

.0 ±

3.5

(48

) 2

0.1

± 5.

0 (3

2)16

mal

e1.

069

± 0.

01 (

8) 6

.5 ±

2.0

(15

)3.

6 ±

0.8

(15)

7.4

± 1.

7 (1

5) 9

.5 ±

3.8

(15

)12

.9 ±

2.9

(7)

fem

ale

1.0

52 ±

0.0

1 (1

1)10

.9 ±

3.0

(17

)7.

8 ±

3.5

(21)

8.8

± 1.

7 (1

7) 8

.9 ±

2.4

(17

) 2

0.6

± 3.

2 (1

1)17

mal

e 1

.071

± 0

.01

(10)

6.7

± 3

.0 (

19)

3.9

± 1.

1 (1

9)8.

0 ±

1.4

(19)

7.9

± 2

.3 (

19)

11.

9 ±

2.8

(10)

fem

ale

1.05

5 ±

0.01

(5)

13.0

± 4

.0 (

21)

6.8

± 1.

9 (1

1)10

.8 ±

2.8

(21

) 9

.6 ±

3.2

(21

)19

.4 ±

2.5

(5)

18m

ale

1.06

2 ±

0.01

(3)

7.9

± 3.

0 (8

)4.

3 ±

0.8

(8) 0

7.9

± 1.

5 (8

)10

.3 ±

4.5

(8)

016

.2 ±

2.4

(4)

fem

ale

1.04

7 ±

0.02

(3)

13.0

± 4

.0 (

11)

5.3

± 2.

5 (3

) 0 9

.4 ±

2.2

(11

) 8

.5 ±

2.9

(11

)22

.9 ±

7.1

(3)

a Sig

nifi c

antly

(p

< .0

5) h

ighe

r re

sult

for

mal

es w

hen

com

pare

d w

ith f

emal

es; b s

ignifi c

antly

(p

< .0

5) h

ighe

r re

sult

for

fem

ales

whe

n co

mpa

red

with

mal

es.

04Wells(30) 43 1/31/06, 9:37:05 AM


Tab

le 7

A

nth

rop

om

etry

Res

ult

s: M

ean

± S

D (

n)

Age

(yea

rs)

Vari

able

1213

1415

1617

18

Insp

ired

che

st

girt

h (c

m)

mal

e—

89.5

± 6

.9(1

6)a

94.0

± 4

.4

(37)

a *13

95.6

± 5

.2

(52)

a *13

96.8

± 3

.1

(13)

a *13

100.

8 ±

3.1

(11)

a *13

,14,

1510

3.8

± 3.

8 (7

)a *13

,14,

15,1

6

fem

ale

82.7

± 4

.3

(12)

82.9

± 3

.7

(44)

85.5

± 4

.1

(29)

86.2

± 4

.1

(45)

*12,1

387

.7 ±

1.3

(1

1)*12

,13

87.1

± 3

.3

(6)

88.2

± 4

.5

(3)

Exp

ired

che

st

girt

h (c

m)

mal

ea—

81.1

± 7

.5 (

13)a

87.2

± 5

.2

(26)

a *13

89.7

± 5

.2

(41)

a *13

90.1

± 3

.5

(11)

a *13

94.7

± 3

.1

(11)

a *13

,14,

1597

.4 ±

3.5

(7

)a *13

,141

5,16

fem

ale

76.1

± 4

.4

(8)

76.6

± 3

.1 (

35)

77.6

± 4

.5 (

25)

77.8

± 2

.9 (

35)

79.4

± 1

.9 (

11)

79.4

± 3

.6 (

6)80

.7 ±

3.6

(3

)

Upp

er a

rm

girt

h (c

m)

mal

ea—

26.1

± 2

.52

(13)

27.8

± 2

.2(2

6)28

.1 ±

2.2

(43)

*1329

.0 ±

2.1

(1

2)*13

30.2

± 1

.7

(19)

a *13

,14,

1530

.8 ±

1.4

(8

)a *13

,14,

15

fem

ale

25.6

± 1

.0

(8)

26.1

± 1

.77

(35)

27.3

± 2

.51

(27)

27.1

± 2

(3

8)27

.7 ±

1.7

(1

7)28

.1 ±

1.9

(2

1)28

.5 ±

1.7

(1

1)*12

,13

Flex

ed u

pper

arm

gi

rth

(cm

)

mal

ea—

28.6

± 2

.7

(13)

30.1

± 2

.2

(26)

a30

.6 ±

2.0

(4

1)a *

1331

.5 ±

2.3

(1

1)a *

1332

.7 ±

1.3

(1

1)a *

13,1

433

.5 ±

1.4

(7

)a *13

,14

fem

ale

27.3

± 1

.3

(8)

27.6

± 1

.8

(35)

28.9

± 2

.4

(25)

28.7

± 1

.9

(35)

29.6

± 1

.8

(11)

*12,1

330

.3 ±

0.5

3 (6

)*12

,13

29.9

± 1

.4 (

3)

04Wells(30) 44 1/31/06, 9:37:06 AM


Glu

teal

gir

th

(cm

) mal

e—

84.9

± 6

.7

(13)

88.6

± 6

.4

(26)

90.6

± 3

.6

(42)

*1391

.5 ±

3.4

(1

1)*13

93.7

± 3

.6

(16)

*13,1

496

.5 ±

5.1

(7

)*13

,14,

15

fem

ale

86.9

± 4

.1

(8)

87.9

± 4

.1

(35)

b90

.3 ±

5.5

(2

5)90

.1 ±

4.2

(3

7)91

.5 ±

3.8

(1

4)91

.3 ±

3.9

(1

6)92

.1 ±

7.2

(8

)

Thi

gh g

irth

(c

m) m

ale

—49

.3 ±

4.1

(1

3)51

.8 ±

3.7

(2

6)51

.9 ±

3.0

(4

3)52

.9 ±

2.8

(1

2)54

.7 ±

2.9

(1

9)*13

56.3

± 2

.7

(8)*

13,1

4,15

fem

ale

51.3

± 2

.9

(8)

52.1

± 4

.6

(35)

b53

.7 ±

4.3

(2

7)53

.4 ±

2.9

(3

8)54

.5 ±

2.5

(1

7)53

.2 ±

6.9

(2

1)55

.3 ±

4.1

(1

1)

Cal

f gi

rth

(cm

) mal

ea—

33.7

± 2

.1

(13)

35.0

± 2

.2

(26)

35.4

± 1

.7

(41)

a35

.4 ±

2.0

(1

1)37

.3 ±

1.5

(1

1)a *

1338

.04

± 1.

9 (7

)*13

,14

fem

ale

33.0

± 1

.9

(8)

33.8

± 3

.9

(35)

34.1

± 2

.2

(25)

34.1

± 1

.8

(35)

35.4

± 1

.9

(11)

35.0

± 1

.8

(6)

35.8

± 1

.1

(3)

Bi-

acro

mia

l br

eadt

h (c

m)

mal

ea—

36.7

± 2

.8 (

13)

39.0

± 1

.9

(26)

a *13

40.2

± 1

.8

(41)

a *13

39.9

± 1

.4

(11)

a *13

41.2

± 1

.5

(11)

a *13

,14

42.1

± 1

.5

(7)*

13,1

4

fem

ale

36.4

± 1

.5

(8)

37.8

± 4

.7

(35)

37.9

± 1

.3

(25)

37.6

± 2

.6

(35)

38.1

± 1

.6

(11)

37.9

± 1

.5

(6)

— (con

tinu

ed)

04Wells(30) 45 1/31/06, 9:37:08 AM


Bi-

iliac

br

eadt

h (c

m)

mal

e—

25.9

± 1

.1

(13)

27.3

± 1

.5

(26)

27.6

± 1

.2

(41)

*1327

.6 ±

1.3

(1

1)*13

27.4

± 1

.4

(11)

28.4

± 2

.2

(7)*

13

fem

ale

25.3

± 1

.4

(8)

28.2

± 9

.5

(35)

26.6

± 1

.4

(25)

27.4

± 1

.6

(35)

28.1

± 1

.5

(11)

27.4

± 2

.1

(6)

—

Epi

cond

ylar

hu

mer

us

brea

dth

(cm

)

mal

ea—

6.9

± 0.

5 (1

3)7.

1 ±

0.4

(26)

a7.

2 ±

0.4

(41)

a7.

1 ±

0.3

(11)

7.1

± 0.

2 (1

1)7.

31 ±

0.3

(7

)

fem

ale

6.3

± 0.

3 (8

)6.

7 ±

2.4

(35)

6.4

± 0.

3 (2

5)6.

3 ±

0.3

(35)

6.4

± 0.

3 (1

1)6.

4 ±

0.2

(6)

—E

pico

ndyl

ar f

emur

br

eadt

h (c

m)

mal

ea—

9.6

± 0.

4 (1

6)a

9.7

± 0.

4 (3

7)a

9.7

± 0.

4 (5

2)a

9.6

± 0.

4 (1

3)a

9.6

± 0.

5 (1

1)a

9.5

± 0.

7 (7

)

fem

ale

8.7

± 0.

3 (1

2)8.

4 ±

1.2

(44)

8.8

± 0.

4 (2

8)8.

7 ±

0.3

(45)

8.8

± 0.

4 (1

1)8.

7 ±

0.5

(6)

—a S

ignifi c

antly

(p

< .0

5) h

ighe

r re

sult

for

mal

es w

hen

com

pare

d w

ith f

emal

es; b S

ignifi c

antly

(p

< .0

5) h

ighe

r re

sult

for

fem

ales

whe

n co

mpa

red

with

mal

es.

*Sig

nifi c

antly

(p

< .0

5) h

ighe

r va

lue

com

pare

d w

ith th

e su

pers

crip

ted

age.

Age

(yea

rs)

Vari

able

1213

1415

1617

18

Tab

le 7

(c

on

tin

ued

)

04Wells(30) 46 1/31/06, 9:37:09 AM


for body mass, did not vary with age. This result confi rmed previous suggestions that improving athletic performance might be more closely related to developing the ability to work at a high percentage of maximal aerobic power than to increas-ing maximal aerobic power per se (39). Our study also confi rmed that males have higher absolute and relative aerobic power values than females (15,26). More spe-cifi cally, Drinkwater et al. (15) found that absolute maximal aerobic power (VO

2max,

L/min) was 52% higher in males. In the current study, the maximal aerobic power values for the males were approximately 36% higher than the values for females. This result might be the result of the combination of larger cardiac volume, blood volume, and hemoglobin concentration in the male participants. Further, Drink-water et al. (15) reported that when maximal aerobic power was expressed per kg of body weight, the gender difference declined to 18%; the current studyʼs results are in agreement, with the difference in relative VO

2max declining to 17%. These

results were expected because the athletes were standardized for the amount of metabolically active tissue.

Cardiovascular Function

The values obtained for hemoglobin and hematocrit were in agreement with fi nd-ings from other reports on elite swimmers (22,31). Blood pressure values obtained for swimmers in the current research were similar to those Mujika et al. (33) and Kirwan et al. (25) reported for competitive swimmers during intense training. Our study also confi rmed that males have lower maximal heart rates during exercise than females (54). Maximal heart rates decreased with age for both male and female swimmers in the current research. These fi ndings agreed with age-related decreases in aerobic parameters found in studies of older women (18) and men (55), although this trend has not been previously reported in children.

Respiratory Function

The pulmonary function data that we reported for female swimmers were similar to Wilson and Tanakaʼs (55) fi ndings about pulmonary function in university-level female swimmers. The higher maximal ventilation values that the males in our study achieved during exercise compared with the females likely could be attributed to higher tidal volumes because we found that female participants maintained a breath-ing frequency during the exercise tests. An increase was observed in both residual volume and forced vital capacity with age. This result supported Clanton et al.ʼs (12) hypothesis that intensive swimming training enhances static and dynamic lung volumes and improves the conductive properties of both the large and the small airways. Courteix et al. (13) suggested that the larger values for vital capacity seen in swimmers versus nonswimmers (49) might result from both training during the growth period and genetic endowment, which, in turn, supported Andrew et al.ʼs (1) fi nding that female swimmers had higher lung volumes than their nonathletic counterparts. In addition, Astrand et al. (3) reported that changes in physical activity positively correlated to changes in forced vital capacity. In our study respiratory exchange ratio was higher (1.5%) in the males than in the females, but the results did not reach signifi cance. These results are similar to previous research that found that females have a 3–4% lower RER during submaximal exercise, which refl ects

04Wells(30) 47 1/31/06, 9:37:10 AM


the use of a greater proportion of fat as fuel (46), although the current results are based on a younger population.

Strength and Power

The swim-bench measurements were used to assess overall muscular power and endurance during the task-specifi c movements of swimming. Although swim-bench results for competitive swimmers have been reported previously (45), the current research was the fi rst to report values for single-stroke maximal power and for 4-min stroke-specifi c muscular endurance. The Cybex measurements were important for assessing individual muscle(s) involved in swimming movement patterns. Iso-kinetic strength results for specifi c muscle groups involved in swimming strokes have not been previously measured. Sharp et al. (40) reported a strong correlation between arm muscular power output and sprint swimming speed (r = 0.90); thus, the currently reported measurement might offer an objective assessment of a com-ponent essential for success in swimming. It has also been reported that vertical jump and force–velocity relationships are related to muscle-fi ber-type composition and event specialization in swimmers (19). Therefore, the characterization of leg power, arm strength, and swimming-movement-specifi c force measurements in elite-level swimmers in the current research provides an important set of data for talent identifi cation and event selection.

The observed gender differences in strength and power in our study confi rmed Bencke et al.ʼs (5) results regarding younger swimmers. It is interesting that, although strength increased across the age ranges sampled in the current research, there were no signifi cant increases in either vertical jump (a measure of leg power) or in stroke-specifi c arm power. Because increases in power output have been cor-related with increases in swimming speed, the current results suggest that greater emphasis should be placed on power training as part of the overall training program for competitive swimming. The observed gender differences in strength and power might be a result of the greater muscle mass in males than in females.

Body Composition

The gender differences observed in the current research were in agreement with those in previous research (42) that indicated that body composition measurements may be predictors of swimming performance in women but not in men. Our results were consistent with previously reported values for elite adolescent competitive swimmers (47). Measures of body size (height, weight, and girths) were found to increase with age, as expected, but body fat percentage did not, which suggested that it might be important to establish good nutritional habits and fi tness at a young age. The larger proportion of fat mass in the female swimmers might allow for more buoyancy, which could be an advantage that allows females to kick at a higher rate and with a better buoyancy profi le than male swimmers (30). It is important to note that internal and external pressures on girls to achieve or maintain unrealistically low body weight underlies the development of the female athlete triad of disorders (disordered eating, amenorrhoea, and osteoporosis), leading to serious health consequences and thus poor athletic performances (36). Therefore, the body composition results of this research should be interpreted as descriptive

04Wells(30) 48 1/31/06, 9:37:12 AM


of this research population only and not used for other purposes. Further, we have not analyzed the results to correlate with performance results, so inferences about the body composition characteristics of these athletes related to performance should not be made based on these results.

Anthropometry

Our results were consistent with previously reported values for elite adolescent competitive swimmers (47). Previous research on anthropometry in athletes has suggested that certain physical characteristics such as height and limb length are associated with higher levels of performance in a given population of athletes (28). Although previous research has been published on the anthropometric characteristics of elite swimmers (47) and on anthropometric and other physical characteristics related to performance (42), the current research has examined a larger participant pool, has included both male and female athletes, and has included results from a broader range of ages.

ConclusionsIn summary, we have established normative data for healthy, highly trained male and female swimmers by using standard protocols across ages 12 to 18 years. The current research represents a signifi cant addition to the literature because of its comprehensive physiological analysis, the inclusion of both male and female participants, and the wide age range studied. This normative data will (a) allow researchers to fi ne tune future assessment packages by eliminating those variables that had no predictive power for performance, thereby decreasing both time and expense; (b) provide researchers with an established database upon which to update norms with results from future research projects; and (c) provide a reference upon which talent-identifi cation programs could be based and monitoring programs could be established. Further, the physiological characteristics of the general popula-tion and of individuals with medical conditions in similar age categories could be evaluated in the context of the upper extremes of human physiological function that have been included in this normative data.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the athletes and coaches of the Canadian National and Youth National teams for their participation. Dr. Wells is supported by the Irwin Foundation at the Hospital for Sick Children. We thank Barbara Bauer for her valuable editorial assistance.

References

1. Andrew, G.M., M.R. Becklake, J.S. Guleria, and D.V. Bates. Heart and lung functions in swimmers and non-athletes during growth. J. Appl. Physiol. 32:245-51, 1972.

2. Arntsen, K.W., A.C. Deacon, and H.G. Worth. The Hycel-M multichannel analyzer—a model for evaluation. Clin. Chem. 28:1338-43, 1982.

04Wells(30) 49 1/31/06, 9:37:13 AM


3. Astrand, P.O., B.O. Eriksson, I. Nylander, L. Engstroem, P. Karlberg, B. Saltin, and C. ThorʼEn. Girl swimmers. With special reference to respiratory and circulatory adapta-tion and gynaecological and psychiatric aspects. Acta Paediatr. 43:147:1-75, 1963.

4. Bagnall, K.M., and D.W. Kellett. A study of potential Olympic swimmers: I, the starting point. Br. J. Sports Med. 11:127-32, 1977.

5. Bencke, J., R. Damsgaard, A. Saekmose, P. Jorgensen, K. Jorgensen, and K. Klausen. Anaerobic power and muscle strength characteristics of 11 years old elite and non-elite boys and girls from gymnastics, team handball, tennis and swimming. Scand. J. Med. Sci. Sports. 12:171-8, 2002.

6. Berger, M.A., A.P. Hollander, and G. De Groot. Technique and energy losses in front crawl swimming. Med. Sci. Sports.29:1491-8, 1997.

7. Capelli, C., P. Zamparo, A. Cigalotto, M.P. Francescato, R.G. Soule, B. Termin, D.R. Pendergast, and P.E. Di Prampero. Bioenergetics and biomechanics of front crawl swimming. J. Appl. Physiol. 78:674-9, 1995.

8. Capelli, C., D.R. Pendergast, and B. Termin. Energetics of swimming at maximal speeds in humans. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 78:385-93, 1998.

9. Chatard, J.C., C. Collomp, E. Maglischo, and C. Maglischo. Swimming skill and stroking characteristics of front crawl swimmers. Int. J. Sports Med. 11:156-61, 1990.

10. Chatard, J.C., J.M. Lavoie, B. Bourgoin, and J.R. Lacour. The contribution of pas-sive drag as a determinant of swimming performance. Int. J. Sports Med. 11:367-72, 1990.

11. Chollet, D., P. Pelayo, C. Delaplace, C. Tourny, and M. Sidney. Stroking characteristic variations in the 100-M freestyle for male swimmers of differing skill. Percept. Mot. Skills 85:167-77, 1997.

12. Clanton, T.L., G. F. Dixon, J. Drake, and J.E. Gadek. Effects of swim training on lung volumes and inspiratory muscle conditioning. J. Appl. Physiol. 62:39-46, 1987.

13. Courteix, D., P. Obert, A.M. Lecoq, P. Guenon, and Koch, G. Effect of intensive swim-ming training on lung volumes, airway resistance and on the maximal expiratory fl ow-volume relationship in pre-pubertal girls. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. Occup. Physiol. 76:264-9, 1997.

14. Damsgaard, R., J. Bencke, G. Matthiesen, J.H. Petersen, and J. Muller. Body propor-tions, body composition and pubertal development of children in competitive sports. Scand. J. Med. Sci. Sports.11:54-60, 2001.

15. Drinkwater, B.L. Women and exercise: physiological aspects. Exerc. Sport Sci. Rev. 12:21-51, 1984.

16. Durnin, J.V., and J. Womersley. Body fat assessed from total body density and its estimation from skinfold thickness: measurements on 481 men and women aged from 16 to 72 years. Br. J. Nutr. 32:77-97, 1974.

17. Dwyer, J. Marathon swimmers: physiologic characteristics. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fit-ness. 3:263-72, 1983.

18. Eskurza, I., A.J. Donato, K.L. Moreau, D.R. Seals, and H. Tanaka. Changes in maximal aerobic capacity with age in endurance-trained women: 7-yr follow-up. J. Appl. Physiol. 92:2303-8, 2002.

19. Gerard, E.S., V.J. Caiozzo, B.D. Rubin, C.A. Prietto, and D.M. Davidson. Skeletal muscle profi les among elite long, middle, and short distance swimmers. Am. J. Sports Med. 14:77-82, 1986.

20. Hawley, J.A., M.M. Williams, M.M. Vickovic, and P.J. Handcock. Muscle power predicts freestyle swimming performance. Br. J. Sports Med. 26:151-5, 1992.

21. Haywood, K.M., B.A. Clark, and J.L. Mayhew. Differential effects of age-group gym-nastics and swimming on body composition, strength, and fl exibility. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fitness. 26:416-20, 1986.

04Wells(30) 50 1/31/06, 9:37:15 AM


22. Heinicke, K., B. Wolfarth, P. Winchenbach, B. Biermann, A. Schmid, G. Huber, B. Friedmann, and W. Schmidt. Blood volume and hemoglobin mass in elite athletes of different disciplines. Int. J. Sports Med. 22:504-12, 2001.

23. Hooper, S.L., L. T. Mackinnon, A. Howard, R.D. Gordon, A. W. Bachmann. Markers for monitoring overtraining and recovery. Med. Sci. Sports. 27:106-12, 1995.

24. Kellett, D.W., P.L. Willan, and K.M. Bagnall. A study of potential Olympic swimmers. Part 2. Changes due to three months intensive training. Br. J. Sports Med. 12:87-92, 1978.

25. Kirwan, J.P., D. L. Costill, M. G. Flynn, J. B. Mitchell, W. J. Fink, P. D. Neufer, and J. A. Houmard. Physiological responses to successive days of intense training in competi-tive swimmers. Med. Sci. Sports. 20:255-9, 1988.

26. Kubukeli, Z.N., T.D. Noakes, and S.C. Dennis. Training techniques to improve endur-ance exercise performances. Sports Med. 32:489-509, 2002.

27. Lavoie, J.M., and R.R. Montpetit. Applied physiology of swimming. Sports Med. 3:165-89, 1986.

28. Leone, M., G. Lariviere, and A.S. Comtois. Discriminant analysis of anthropometric and biomotor variables among elite adolescent female athletes in four sports. J. Sports Sci. 20:443-9, 2002.

29. Magel, J.R., and J.A. Faulkner. Maximum oxygen uptakes of college swimmers. J. Appl. Physiol. 22:929-33, 1967.

30. McLean, S.P., and R.N. Hinrichs. Sex differences in the centre of buoyancy location of competitive swimmers. J. Sports Sci. 16:373-83, 1998.

31. McMurray, R.G., J.S. Harrell, C. B. Bradley, S. Deng, and S. I. Bangdiwala. Predicted maximal aerobic power in youth is related to age, gender, and ethnicity. Med. Sci. Sports. 34:145-51, 2002.

32. Millet, G.P., P. Dreano, and D.J. Bentley. Physiological characteristics of elite short- and long-distance triathletes. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 88:427-30, 2003.

33. Mujika, I., S. Padilla, A. Geyssant, and J.C. Chatard. Hematological responses to train-ing and taper in competitive swimmers: relationships with performance. Arch. Physiol. Biochem. 105:379-85, 1998.

34. National Heart and Lung Institute. Recommended standardization procedures for NHLI lung program epidemiology studies. Author: Bethesda, MD: 221-225, 1971.

35. Obert, P., G. Falgairette, M. Bedu, and J. Coudert. Bioenergetic characteristics of swim-mers determined during an arm-ergometer test and during swimming. Int. J. Sports Med. 13:298-303, 1992.

36. Otis, C.L., B. Drinkwater, M. Johnson, A. Loucks, and J. Wilmore. American College of Sports Medicine position stand. The female athlete triad. Med Sci Sports. 29:i-ix, 1997.

37. Pyne, D.B., H. Lee, and K.M. Swanwick. Monitoring the lactate threshold in world-ranked swimmers. Med. Sci. Sports. 33:291-297, 2001.

38. Ready, A.E., R.B. Eynon, and D.A. Cunningham. Effect of interval training and detrain-ing on anaerobic fi tness in women. Can. J. Appl. Sport Sci. 6:114-8, 1981.

39. Rodriguez, F.A. Maximal oxygen uptake and cardiorespiratory response to maximal 400-m free swimming, running and cycling tests in competitive swimmers. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fitness. 40:87-95, 2000.

40. Sharp, R.L., J.P. Troup, and D.L. Costill, Relationship between power and sprint free-style swimming. Med. Sci. Sports. 14:53-6, 1982.

41. Shephard, R.J., G. Godin, and R. Campbell. Characteristics of sprint, medium and long-distance swimmers. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 32:99-116, 1974.

42. Siders, W.A., H.C. Lukaski, and W.W. Bolonchuk. Relationships among swimming performance, body composition and somatotype in competitive collegiate swimmers. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fitness. 3:166-71, 1993.

04Wells(30) 51 1/31/06, 9:37:17 AM


43. Smith, D.J., S.R. Norris, and J.M. Hogg. Performance evaluation of swimmers: scientifi c tools. Sports Med. 32:539-54, 2002.

44. Sprague, H.A. Relationship of certain physical measurements to swimming speed. Res. Q. 47:810-4, 1976.

45. Swaine, I.L. Cardiopulmonary responses to exercise in swimmer using a swim bench and a leg-kicking ergometer. Int. J. Sports Med. 18:359-62, 1997.

46. Tarnopolsky, M.A. Gender differences in metabolism; nutrition and supplements. J. Sci. Med. Sport. 3:287-98, 2000.

47. Thorland, W.G., G.O. Johnson, T.J. Housh, and M.J. Refsell. Anthropometric charac-teristics of elite adolescent competitive swimmers. Hum. Biol. 55:735-48, 1983.

48. Toussaint, H.M., and A.P. Hollander. Energetics of competitive swimming. Implications for training programmes. Sports Med. 18:384-405, 1994.

49. Twisk, J.W., B.J. Staal, M.N. Brinkman, H.C. Kemper, and W. van Mechelen. Tracking of lung function parameters and the longitudinal relationship with lifestyle. Eur. Respir. J. 12:627-34, 1998.

50. Vaccaro, P., and D.H. Clarke. Cardiorespiratory alterations in 9- to 11-year-old children following a season of competitive swimming. Med. Sci. Sports. 10:204-7, 1978.

51. Vaccaro, P., D.H. Clarke, and A.F. Morris. Physiological characteristics of young well-trained swimmers. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. Occup. Physiol. 44:61-6, 1980.

52. Wakayoshi, K., T. Yoshida, Y. Ikuta, Y. Mutoh, and M. Miyashita. Adaptations to six months of aerobic swim training. Changes in velocity, stroke rate, stroke length and blood lactate. Int. J. Sports Med. 14:368-72, 1993.

53. Wakayoshi, K., L.J. DʼAcquisto, J.M. Cappaert, and J.P. Troup. Relationship between oxygen uptake, stroke rate and swimming velocity in competitive swimming. Int. J. Sports Med. 16:19-23, 1995.

54. Washington, R.L., J.C. van Gundy, C. Cohen, H.M. Sondheimer, and R.R. Wolfe. Normal aerobic and anaerobic exercise data for North American school-age children. J. Pediatr. 112:223-33, 1988.

55. Wilson, T.M., and H. Tanaka. Meta-analysis of the age-associated decline in maximal aerobic capacity in men: relation to training status. Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol. 278:H829-34, 2000.

56. Wutscherk, H. Value and possibilities of somatotype determination in young athletes. Arztl. Jugendkd. 74:330-44, 1983.

57. Zauner, C.W., and N.Y. Benson. Physiological alterations in young swimmers during 3 years of intensive training. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fitness. 21:179-85, 1981

04Wells(30) 52 1/31/06, 9:37:20 AM

Documents

Normal Physiological Characteristics of Elite Swimmers · 2017-09-27 · Normal Physiological Characteristics of Elite Swimmers Gregory D. Wells The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto