The mean

The mean kinase inhibitor Navitoclax power during the 30 s test was recorded in W?kg?1. (e) Handgrip strength test (HST). The participants were asked to stand with their elbow bent at approximately 90�� and instructed to squeeze the handle of the handgrip dynamometer (Takei, Tokyo, Japan) as hard as possible for 5 seconds (Adam et al., 1988). HST was calculated as the sum of the best efforts for each hand divided by body mass and expressed as kg?kg?1 of body mass. (f) Force-velocity test (F-v). The F-v test was employed to assess maximal anaerobic power (Pmax expressed as W?kg?1). This test employed various braking forces that elicit different pedaling velocities in order to derive Pmax (Vandewalle et al., 1985). The participants performed four sprints, each one lasting 7 s, against incremental braking force (2, 3, 4 and 5 kg) on a cycle ergometer (Ergomedics 874, Monark, Sweden), interspersed by 5 min recovery periods.

(g) The WAnT (Bar-Or and Skinner, 1996) was performed in the same ergometer as the F-v did. Briefly, participants were asked to pedal as fast as possible for 30 s against a braking force that was determined by the product of body mass in kg by 0.075. Mean power (Pmean) was calculated as the average power during the 30 s period and was expressed as W?kg?1. Statistical analysis Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS v.20.0 (SPSS, Chicago, USA). Data were expressed as mean and standard deviations of the mean (SD). One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), with a sub-sequent Tukey post-hoc test (if difference between the groups was revealed) were used to examine differences in physical and physiological characteristics among the three handball teams.

The level of significance was set at ��=0.05, and mean difference �� SD together with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was calculated when the post-hoc was necessary. In addition, stepwise discriminant analysis was used for physical and physiological characteristics with team ranking as the dependent variable. Results The ANOVA analysis revealed (Table 1) significant differences between the players of the three teams in stature and FFM. Players from team C had lower stature compared to players from team A (?6.2��2.2 cm (?11.7; ?0.7), mean difference��SD (95% CI)) and team B (?9.2��2.2 cm (?14.5; ?4.0), respectively). Also, players from team C had lower amounts of FFM compared to the other two teams, with ?6.

4��2.2 kg (?11.8;?1.1) and ?5.4��2.1 (?10.5; ?0.2) relative to A and B, respectively. Table 1 Physical characteristics of participants with ANOVA and Tukey post �Choc indicating mean differences between the players of the teams As shown in Table 2 there were significant between group differences in Pmean, SJ, CMJ, CMJarm and the 30 s Bosco test. The Tukey post-hoc analysis Drug_discovery revealed that players in team A scored higher on Pmean than both players in teams B (+0.48��0.18 W?kg?1 (0.05;0.92)) and C (+0.46��0.19 W?kg?1 (0.01;0.92)), respectively.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>