GAO Jiu-xiang, SU Xiang-nan, LIANG Ya-pu, ZHU Xiao-ying, XUE Hao-wei, LI Rong-rong, YU Liang
Objective:To make scientific and reasonable training plans for different training purposes by comparing the impact of different sprint interval training programs on aerobic and anaerobic abilities and analyzing the influencing factors from the perspective of skeletal muscle anaerobic metabolism. Methods:48 subjects were randomly divided into training method A (A, n=10) with an 8% resistance coefficient sprint for 30 seconds, training method B with a 9% resistance coefficient sprint for 30 seconds (B, n=9), training method C with an 8% resistance coefficient sprint for 45 seconds (C, n=10), training method D with a 9% resistance coefficient sprint for 45 seconds (D, n=8) for 4 weeks, 3 times a week, 5 times with an interval of 5 minutes' sprint interval training. Aerobic and anaerobic abilities test (CMJ, long jump, 30m, VO2max), anaerobic power (3 indicators), muscle function testing including surface electromyography (8 indicators), isokinetic muscle strength (8 indicators) were tested before and after training. Results:① The impact of four types of SITs on aerobic and anaerobic test: Mode A can significantly improve the scores of long jump, 30m and VO2max (P<0.05); Mode B can significantly affect the scores of CMJ, long jump, 30m and VO2max (P<0.05); Mode C can significantly improve the scores of 30m and VO2max (P<0.05); Mode D can significantly improve 30m sprint test (P<0.01); Mode ABD had significant difference in the increase of VO2max (P<0.05); ② The effects of four SIT methods on aerobic and anaerobic capacity: MethodA screened 3 factors in anaerobic and isokinetic to explain their impact on power, with a contribution rate of 75.89%, while the non-screened factors for speed and aerobic capacity were explained; MethodB screened 3 factors from anaerobic, electromyography and isokinetic to explain their impact on power, with a contribution rate of 65.09%, and explained the non-screened factors of speed and aerobic capacity; MethodC can screen 3 and 5 factors from electromyography and isokinetic to explain the velocity and aerobic capacity, with a contribution rate of 82.28%; The D training method can screen 5 factors from electromyography and isokinetic to explain their impact on power and speed, with a contribution rate of 81.68%, which has limited effect on power improvement; ③The contribution rate of electromyography and isokinetic to the difference in aerobic and anaerobic test after four SIT methods is 37.15%, and no anaerobic factors can be selected for explanation. Conclusion:① A and B training with a sprint time of 30s can be used as power training methods; 4 kinds of SIT training can be used as training methods to improve speed ability; A, B and D training modes can be selected when improving aerobic capacity; ② Anaerobic and skeletal muscle factors can be used as important contribution variables to explain the effects of four kinds of SIT training;③The difference of aerobic and anaerobic abilities caused by the 4 SIT training modes is related to the MPF of lower limb skeletal muscle and the peak torque of knee flexion, but the degree of interpretation is limited. It is independent of Wingate peak/average power and anaerobic power decline rate.