@misc{CarlsohnScharhagRosenbergerCasseletal.2017,
  author    = {Carlsohn, Anja and Scharhag-Rosenberger, Friederike and Cassel, Michael and Mayer, Frank},
  title     = {Resting Metabolic Rate in Elite Rowers and Canoeists: Difference between Indirect Calorimetry and Prediction},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-399837},
  pages     = {6},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {Background: Athletes may differ in their resting metabolic rate (RMR) from the general population. However, to estimate the RMR in athletes, prediction equations that have not been validated in athletes are often used. The purpose of this study was therefore to verify the applicability of commonly used RMR predictions for use in athletes. Methods: The RMR was measured by indirect calorimetry in 17 highly trained rowers and canoeists of the German national teams (BMI 24 ± 2 kg/m2, fat-free mass 69 ± 15 kg). In addition, the RMR was predicted using Cunningham (CUN) and Harris-Benedict (HB) equations. A two-way repeated measures ANOVA was calculated to test for differences between predicted and measured RMR (α = 0.05). The root mean square percentage error (RMSPE) was calculated and the Bland-Altman procedure was used to quantify the bias for each prediction. Results: Prediction equations significantly underestimated the RMR in males (p < 0.001). The RMSPE was calculated to be 18.4\% (CUN) and 20.9\% (HB) in the entire group. The bias was 133 kcal/24 h for CUN and 202 kcal/24 h for HB. Conclusions: Predictions significantly underestimate the RMR in male heavyweight endurance athletes but not in females. In athletes with a high fat-free mass, prediction equations might therefore not be applicable to estimate energy requirements. Instead, measurement of the resting energy expenditure or specific prediction equations might be needed for the individual heavyweight athlete.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{DeSouzaSilveiraCarlsohnLangenetal.2016,
  author    = {De Souza Silveira, Raul and Carlsohn, Anja and Langen, Georg and Mayer, Frank and Scharhag-Rosenberger, Friederike},
  title     = {Reliability and day-to-day variability of peak fat oxidation during treadmill ergometry},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {423},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-407334},
  pages     = {7},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Background: Exercising at intensities where fat oxidation rates are high has been shown to induce metabolic benefits in recreational and health-oriented sportsmen. The exercise intensity (Fat peak ) eliciting peak fat oxidation rates is therefore of particular interest when aiming to prescribe exercise for the purpose of fat oxidation and related metabolic effects. Although running and walking are feasible and popular among the target population, no reliable protocols are available to assess Fat peak as well as its actual velocity (V PFO ) during treadmill ergometry. Our purpose was therefore, to assess the reliability and day-to-day variability of V PFO and Fat peak during treadmill ergometry running. Methods: Sixteen recreational athletes (f = 7, m = 9; 25 ± 3 y; 1.76 ± 0.09 m; 68.3 ± 13.7 kg; 23.1 ± 2.9 kg/m 2 ) performed 2 different running protocols on 3 different days with standardized nutrition the day before testing. At day 1, peak oxygen uptake (VO 2peak ) and the velocities at the aerobic threshold (V LT ) and respiratory exchange ratio (RER) of 1.00 (V RER ) were assessed. At days 2 and 3, subjects ran an identical submaximal incremental test (Fat-peak test) composed of a 10 min warm-up (70 \% V LT ) followed by 5 stages of 6 min with equal increments (stage 1 = V LT , stage 5 = V RER ). Breath-by-breath gas exchange data was measured continuously and used to determine fat oxidation rates. A third order polynomial function was used to identify V PFO and subsequently Fat peak . The reproducibility and variability of variables was verified with an int raclass correlation coef ficient (ICC), Pearson ' s correlation coefficient, coefficient of variation (CV) an d the mean differences (bias) ± 95 \% limits of agreement (LoA). Results: ICC, Pearson ' s correlation and CV for V PFO and Fat peak were 0.98, 0.97, 5.0 \%; and 0.90, 0.81, 7.0 \%, respectively. Bias ± 95 \% LoA was - 0.3 ± 0.9 km/h for V PFO and - 2±8\%ofVO 2peak for Fat peak. Conclusion: In summary, relative and absolute reliability indicators for V PFO and Fat peak were found to be excellent. The observed LoA may now serve as a basis for future training prescriptions, although fat oxidation rates at prolonged exercise bouts at this intensity still need to be investigated.},
  language  = {en}
}