"Upper Versus Lower Body Contribution to the Rowing Stroke" by Davon I. Jones

Date of Award

2011

Degree Type

Thesis

Department

Education and Human Services

First Advisor

Sparks, Kenneth

Subject Headings

Rowing, Rowing -- Physiological aspects, Energy metabolism -- Measurement -- Case studies, Rowing, Power Output, Energy Expenditure, Upper Body, Lower Body, Rowing Stroke, Rowing Ergometer, Gender, Training

Abstract

Purpose: This study examined energy expenditure and power output by the upper and lower body, as well as gender, and training differences, using the Concept II Model E rowing ergometer. It was hypothesized that (1) there will be greater energy expenditure and power output with the lower body as compared to the upper body, (2) there will be a significantly greater upper and lower body energy expenditure and power output for males in the rowing stroke, and (3) there will be a significantly greater lower body energy expenditure and power output for trained rowers. Methods: Subjects included 14 males (7 trained, 7 untrained) and 14 females (7 trained, 7 untrained). Test 1 had participants rowing using the full body a 1000 meter all out row was performed. Test 2 had the pull-chain from the row handle directly attached to the seat of the Concept II to isolate only lower body rowing input. Rowers then completed a 1000m row using the lower body at the same cadence of the full body row. To determine the contribution of the upper body, the results of test 2 were subtracted from test 1. Power output, energy expenditure, row time, distance per stroke, blood lactate, heart rate, and rate of perceived exertion were recorded. A repeated measures ANOVA was used to compare upper vs lower body, and independent t-tests were used to analyze gender and training effects. Results: Upper body power output (188.6 ± 60.5) was significantly greater than lower body (60.2 ± 28.5) power output (p=.001). Lower body energy expenditure (5.5 ± 4.5) was significantly greater than upper body (8.5 ± 3.8) energy expenditure (p=.043). There was a significant upper/lower by gender interaction for power, with upper body power output significantly greater in males (p=.018). There was a significant upper/lower by training interaction for both power and energy expenditure, with lower body power output (p=.008) and lower body energy expenditure (p=.021) significantly greater for trained. Conclusion: Upper versus lower body differences show

Included in

Education Commons

COinS