See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/324694491

Is the Functional Threshold Power (FTP) a Valid Surrogate of the Lactate

Threshold?

Article  in  International journal of sports physiology and performance · April 2018

DOI: 10.1123/ijspp.2018-0008

CITATIONS READS
2 767

5 authors, including:

Pedro L. Valenzuela Javier Salvador Morales Rojas

University of Alcalá European University of Madrid
29 PUBLICATIONS   26 CITATIONS    19 PUBLICATIONS   14 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Carl Foster Pedro de la Villa

University of Wisconsin - La Crosse University of Alcalá
570 PUBLICATIONS   14,628 CITATIONS    133 PUBLICATIONS   1,940 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Physiology of retinal cells View project

molecular circadian expression View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Pedro L. Valenzuela on 11 August 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, (Ahead of Print)
https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2018-0008
© 2018 Human Kinetics, Inc. ORIGINAL INVESTIGATION

Is the Functional Threshold Power a Valid Surrogate

of the Lactate Threshold?
Pedro L. Valenzuela, Javier S. Morales, Carl Foster, Alejandro Lucia, and Pedro de la Villa

Purpose: This study aimed to analyze the relationship between the functional threshold power (FTP) and the lactate threshold
(LT). Methods: A total of 20 male cyclists performed an incremental test in which the LT was determined. At least 48 hours later,
they performed a 20-minute time trial, and 95% of the mean power output was defined as FTP. Participants were divided into
recreational (peak power output < 4.5 W·kg−1; n = 11) or trained cyclists (peak power output > 4.5 W·kg−1; n = 9) according to
their fitness status. Results: The FTP (240 [35] W) was overall not significantly different (effect size = 0.20; limits of agreement
= −2.4% [11.5%]) from the LT (246 [24] W), and both markers were strongly correlated (r = .95; P < .0001). Accounting for the
participants’ fitness status, no significant differences were found between FTP and LT (effect size = 0.22; limits of agreement =
2.1% [7.8%]) in trained cyclists, but FTP was significantly lower than the LT (P = .0004, effect size = 0.81; limits of agreement =
−6.5% [8.3%]) in recreational cyclists. A significant relationship was found between relative peak power output and the bias
between FTP and the LT markers (r = .77; P < .0001). Conclusions: The FTP is a valid field test-based marker for the assessment
of endurance fitness. However, caution should be taken when using the FTP interchangeably with the LT as the bias between
markers seems to depend on the athletes’ fitness status. Whereas the FTP provides a good estimate of the LT in trained cyclists, in
recreational cyclists, FTP may underestimate LT.

Keywords: endurance, performance, training, cycling, power output, testing

The lactate threshold (LT), usually defined as the maximum
workload that precedes an exponential rise in blood lactate values
during an incremental test, is one of the most popular markers of the
so-called anaerobic transition. This marker has been extensively
used as a predictor of endurance performance as well as for training
control.1
Although the assessment of the LT is useful to analyze fitness
changes and for training prescription, it requires laboratory tests for
determination, so its regular use is difficult for ordinary athletes.
For this reason, and in view of the growing popularity and
affordability of power meters, more practical field test-based
markers that can be conducted regularly have been proposed as
surrogates of the LT.2
One of the most commonly used field-test methods for the
estimation of the LT is the functional threshold power (FTP), which
has been defined as the highest power that can be maintained in a
semisteady state.2 This marker is very popular among athletes and
coaches, who use it for exercise intensity prescription, for the
assessment of training adaptations and for the determination of the
training load through the Training Stress Score™.2,3 In practical
terms, the FTP corresponds to the highest mean power that athletes
can sustain for around 1-hour under competitive conditions
(eg, highly motivated, well rested, and appropriate nutrition).
Due to the physical and psychological difficulty of regularly
performing a 1-hour maximum test, it has been proposed that
Valenzuela and de la Villa are with Physiology Unit, Systems Biology Dept,
University of Alcalá, Madrid, Spain. Valenzuela is also with the Dept of Sport
and Health, Spanish Agency for Health Protection in Sport (AEPSAD), Madrid,
Spain. Morales and Lucia are with the Universidad Europea de Madrid, Madrid,
Spain. Foster is with the Dept of Exercise and Sport Science, University of
Wisconsin-La Crosse, La Crosse, WI, USA. Valenzuela (pedrol.valenzuela@edu.
Q1 uah.es) is corresponding author.
the FTP can be calculated by subtracting 5% from the mean power
achieved during a 20-minute time trial.2
Despite the widespread use of the FTP based on the 20-minute
test as a surrogate of the LT, to our knowledge, no previous study
has confirmed the proposed relationship between these markers.
The aim of the present study was to analyze their relationship. For
this purpose, we determined the LT through the Dmax method
using an exponential-plus-constant regression to fit the lactate–
workload data during an incremental test, and defined the LT as the
point the lactate–workload curve that yielded the maximal perpen-
dicular distance to the straight line connecting the first and last
points.4,5
Methods
Subjects
A total of 20 healthy male cyclists participated in this study
(descriptive data presented in Table 1). In order to be eligible
for the study, participants had to cycle at least 4 hours per week
during the preceding 3 months and to have a cycling experience
greater than 2 years. The sample included triathletes and cyclists
with different fitness levels, ranging from recreational athletes to
athletes competing at national level. Participants were divided into
2 groups according to their relative peak power output (PPO).6
Those with a PPO between 3.6 and 4.5 W·kg−1 were considered
recreational cyclists (RC; n = 11) and those with a PPO between 4.5
and 5.5 W·kg−1 were considered trained cyclists (TC; n = 9). One
participant achieved a PPO higher than 5.5 (6.1) W·kg−1 and was
included in the TC group.
The present study was accepted by the committee of ethics of
the University of Alcalá (Spain). All the participants had the
procedures explained and provided written informed consent.
Subjects were instructed to maintain their normal dietary pattern
1
 2 Valenzuela et al

Table 1 Descriptive Data of All Subjects, and Comparative Analysis of Age, Anthropometrical Variables, and
Endurance Fitness Markers Between RC and TC
All subjects (n = 20) RC (n = 11) TC (n = 9) P value (ES)
Age, y 32 (6) 32 (5) 33 (8) .64 (0.23)
Weight, kg 71 (6) 74 (6) 68 (5) .04 (1.00)
Height, cm 176 (6) 177 (6) 174 (5) .14 (0.54)
Body fat, % 11.0 (4.5) 12.8 (3.5) 8.5 (4.4) .02 (1.10)
Training volume, h·wk−1 12.0 (6.5) 7.0 (1.8) 17.6 (5.7) <.0001 (2.63)
PPO, W·kg−1 4.47 (0.69) 3.97 (0.20) 5.09 (0.54) <.0001 (2.87)
Peak [lactate], mmol·L−1 11.0 (2.5) 11.4 (2.1) 10.0 (2.3) .19 (0.61)
LT, W·kg−1 3.47 (0.46) 3.14 (0.18) 3.89 (0.36) <.0001 (2.69)
LT, mmol·L−1 4.0 (1.2) 4.8 (0.9) 3.1 (0.7) .003 (1.99)
LT, %PPO 78 (2) 78 (1) 77 (2) .10 (0.63)
FTP, W·kg−1 3.39 (0.62) 2.93 (0.22) 3.96 (0.46) <.0001 (2.96)
Abbreviations: ES, effect size; FTP, functional threshold power; LT, lactate threshold; PPO, peak power output; RC, recreational cyclists; TC, trained cyclists. Note: Data
are presented as mean (SD). P values are obtained from the comparison between RC and TC using unpaired Student’s t tests.

and to refrain from doing intense exercise and consuming ergo-

genic aids or stimulants 48 hours prior to each session. Subjects
presented at the laboratory on 2 occasions, separated by a minimum
gap of 48 hours and a maximum of 2 weeks. Participants’ height
was calculated using a leveled platform scale (Seca, Barcelona,
Spain), and body weight and body fat were calculated using a body
Q2 composition analyzer (TBF-300A; Tanita Corporation, Tokyo,
Japan). The LT was determined through a maximal incremental
test in the first session. During the second session, the subjects
performed the FTP test.
All the tests were performed on a magnetically braked station-
ary cycle ergometer (SNT Medical, Cardgirus, Spain). Previous
research7 has reported an almost perfect concordance (R2 > .99)
between the power output displayed by this cycle ergometer and a Figure 1 — Representative blood lactate/workload curve of one of the
8 participants in which the identification of the LT is shown. LT indicates
Q3 valid power meter, the SRM system, during a laboratory test lactate threshold.
(mean difference between Cardgirus and SRM = 1 [2] W). More-
over, the physiological response to a laboratory test with Cardgirus
was similar to that observed with SRM.7
where w is the workload (Watts), [La−](w) is the blood lactate
Maximal Incremental Test concentration (mmol·L−1) as a function of the workload (w); and a,
b, and c the function parameters determined by nonlinear
After an initial warm-up consisting of 10 minutes of light cycling at regression.
a self-selected intensity, subjects performed a maximal incremental The LT was determined as the point of this curve that yielded
test with an initial workload of 150 W. Workload was increased by the maximal perpendicular distance to the straight line connecting
25 W every 3 minutes until exhaustion or when pedaling cadence the first and last point of this curve. As this point corresponds to that
fell below 60 ppm. This incremental protocol was designed where the slope of the exponential-plus-constant curve is the same
attending to the recommendations by Bentley et al,9 who concluded as the slope of the straight line that connects the first and last point
that this step duration is optimal for the measurement of both of this curve, the slope of the curve was obtained from the first
maximal and submaximal physiological values. The PPO was derivative of the exponential-plus-constant equation11:
defined as the average power output during the final 3 minutes
of the incremental test. For the determination of the LT, 0.5-μL LT exp = flnf½expðc · WfÞ − expðc · WiÞ=½ðc · WfÞ
capillary blood samples were obtained from the earlobe to measure
blood lactate concentration immediately before and after the − ðc · WiÞgg=c,
incremental test, as well as in the last 30 seconds of each stage
where ln is the natural logarithm, c is the parameter of the
Q4 (Lactate Scout; SensLab GmbH, Leipzig, Germany).
The LT was determined from the lactate versus power data exponential-plus-constant equation, and Wi and Wf are the initial
curve based on the Dmax method (Figure 1), which has been and final (equivalent to PPO) workloads of the incremental test.
previously shown as a reliable (intraclass correlation coefficient The blood lactate concentration corresponding to the LT was
[ICC] = .86) LT maker.10 The lactate versus power data was fitted calculated by interpolation, expressing the blood lactate data of
by an exponential-plus-constant regression curve11: each subject as a function of workload. A quadratic equation was
used to perform the regression of lactate versus workload after
½La− ðwÞ = a þ ½b · expðc · wÞ, ensuring the goodness of fit (R2 = 97.6% [2.6%]). Q5
(Ahead of Print)
 Functional Threshold Power and Lactate Threshold 3

FTP Test
Following the protocol proposed by Allen and Coggan,2 subjects
performed a standardized warm-up consisting of 20 minutes of
light pedaling (∼100 W), followed by three 1-minute efforts
pedaling at 100 rpm interspersed with 1-minute recovery of light
cycling, a 5-minute all-out effort, and finally 10 minutes of light
pedaling. After this warm-up, subjects performed a 20-minute time
trial. No specific pacing strategy was recommended, although
participants were encouraged to achieve the highest mean power
during the trial while also being able to finish the 20-minute test.
Subjects were allowed to change gears during the test so as to
maintain their preferred cadence. Verbal encouragement was pro-
vided by the same researcher during all tests to achieve the highest
possible performance. The mean power during the 20-minute test
(P20) was recorded, and the FTP was determined as a 95% of P20.
The mean power output obtained during a 20-minute time trial has
been previously reported as highly reliable (ICC = .98).12

Statistical Analysis
Q6 Data are shown as mean (SD). The normal distribution (Shapiro–
Wilks test) of the data was checked before statistical treatment. ICC
and Pearson’s correlation analysis were carried out to examine the
relationship between the FTP and the LT, and the standard error of
estimation was used to examine the accuracy of prediction. The
ICC, correlation coefficient, and standard error of estimation are
presented along with upper and lower 90% confidence intervals
(CIs). Correlation coefficients of .1, .3, .5, .7, and .9 were consid- Figure 2 — Bland–Altman plot displaying the (A) agreement between
ered small, moderate, strong, very strong, and extremely strong, FTP and the LT and (B) relationship between both markers. In panel A,
respectively.13 Differences between RC and TC were determined solid and dashed horizontal lines represent the bias and the limits of
using unpaired Student’s t tests. Differences between the LT and agreement (bias ± 1.96SD), respectively. In panel B, solid and dashed lines
the FTP were determined using paired Student’s t tests. The represent the regression line and the 90% confidence intervals,
magnitude of the differences (effect size [ES]) was analyzed respectively. White and black dots represent recreational and trained
cyclists, respectively. FTP indicates functional threshold power; LT,
through the standardized mean difference (Hedges’ g). ES greater
lactate threshold. Q9
than 0.2, 0.6, 1.2, 2.0, and 4.0 were considered small, moderate,
large, very large, and extremely large, respectively.13 The limits of
agreement (LoA) between the FTP and the LT are presented as bias
± 1.96SD. The statistical analysis was conducted by using a
Q7 statistical software package (SPSS 20.0). An alpha level of P
< .05 was set to assess statistical significance.

Results
The groups’ characteristics are shown in Table 1. There were no
differences in age or height, but TC presented a significantly lower
body weight and body fat. The training volume and all fitness
markers (LT, FTP, and PPO) were significantly higher in TC than
in RC (Table 1). The LT occurred at a similar relative intensity in
TC and RC, but the associated blood lactate concentration was
significantly lower in the former (Table 1).
When considering all subjects together, the FTP (240 [35] W; Figure 3 — Relationship between the relative PPO and the bias between
75.6% [3.0%] PPO) was not significantly different (P = .08, ES = FTP and the LT. Solid and dashed lines represent the regression line and
0.20) from the LT (246 [24] W; 77.6% [1.8%] PPO). The level of the 90% confidence intervals, respectively. White and black dots represent
agreement between the FTP and the LT is displayed in Figure 2A. recreational and trained cyclists, respectively. PPO indicates peak power
Both markers were extremely strongly correlated (ICC = .90; 90% output; FTP, functional threshold power; LT, lactate threshold.
CI, .79–.95; Figure 2B). Interestingly, the relationship between the
FTP and the LT seemed to be affected by fitness status, with a
significant and very strong relationship between relative PPO and (r = .88; 90% CI, .66–.96; ICC = .89; 90% CI, .71–.96; P < .001)
the bias between FTP and the LT markers (Figure 3). and TC (r = .95; 90% CI, .83–.99; ICC = .92; 90% CI, .75–.98;
Regarding the subgroup analysis, a very to extremely strong P < .001). Nonsignificant and trivial to small differences were
relationship was observed between the FTP and the LT in both RC found between the FTP and the LT (P = .2, ES = 0.22;
(Ahead of Print)
4 Valenzuela et al
LoA = 2.1% [7.8%]) in TC. By contrast, in RC, the FTP was
significantly lower than LT with a moderate effect size (P = .0004,
ES = 0.81; LoA = −6.5% [8.3%]). These differences in RC become
small and nonsignificant when the LT (P = .3, ES = 0.21; LoA =
−1.6% [8.7%]) was compared with P20 (227 [21] W) instead of
with the FTP.
Discussion
The present study shows that the FTP, a field-test-based marker, is
very strongly related with the LT. As the LT is widely accepted as a
predictor of endurance performance,1 these results suggest that the
FTP can be used as a practical marker of cyclists’ endurance fitness.
Despite the widespread use of the FTP based on a 20-minute test, to
our knowledge, only 1 study has previously analyzed this concept
in the scientific literature, reporting that FTP is a valid predictor of
performance in a cross-country mountain bike race.14
In addition, we found no differences overall between the FTP
and the LT. Nevertheless, caution should be taken when using both
endurance markers interchangeably, as in those participants with a
lower fitness status (based on their relative PPO), the FTP was
lower than the LT. Thus, whereas the FTP can be used as a
surrogate of the LT in TC when a laboratory test is not feasible,
in less well-trained athletes, the FTP obtained during a 20-minute
time trial slightly underestimates the LT.
The present results are similar to those of previous studies that
found a strong correlation and no significant differences between a
20-minute time trial and physiological endurance markers, such as
the ventilatory threshold and the respiratory compensation point in
competitive cyclists.12 Similarly, a strong correlation and no
significant differences were found between the mean power during
a 30-minute time trial and the LT determined with the Dmax
method in trained veteran cyclists.15
Alternative field tests have been proposed for the indirect
determination of the LT.16–18 For instance, it has been found that
the mean power achieved during an 8-minute test (P8) is strongly
correlated with the LT, although significant differences were found
between both markers.16 Other authors proposed that, as P8 is
correlated with endurance physiological markers such as the LT, it
could be used to assess physical fitness.18 However, this variable
should not be used interchangeably with laboratory-based thresh-
olds due to the large absolute differences and should therefore not
be used for intensity prescription.18 On the other hand, other
authors found moderate although nonsignificant differences
between the 90% of P8 and the onset of blood lactate accumulation
(OBLA) and a nonsignificant tendency for a correlation between
markers.17 Therefore, although an 8-minute field test has proven a
good predictor of the LT,16,18 in the present study, the FTP based on
a 20-minute test did not only provide an extremely strong correla-
tion but also showed overall no differences with the LT. (Although
as discussed below the agreement between both markers seems to
depend on the athletes’ fitness status.)
An interesting finding of the present study is the relationship
found between relative PPO (a marker of fitness status) and the
bias between FTP and the LT, which suggests that training
increases the ability to maintain the LT-associated power. Several
peripheral training adaptations such as improved energy effi-
ciency, improved metabolite clearance ability, or increased gly-
cogen stores could support this hypothesis.19,20 Indeed, in
agreement with our results, endurance training has previously
proven to result in lower blood lactate concentration at a given
relative intensity,20 with trained athletes showing lower lactate
(Ahead of Print)
levels at the LT than moderately trained ones.21 Nevertheless,
central mechanisms may also play an important role, as endurance
training is associated with a higher pain tolerance22 and endurance
performance is related to the perceived exertion and exercise-
induced pain tolerance.23,24
There is controversy surrounding the LT concept owing to
the existence of different LT markers in the scientific literature.25
Fixed LT markers such as the OBLA and even LT identification
through visual inspection are possibly the most common
methodologies for the determination of the LT. However, sub-
jective methods should be avoided, and fixed LT markers
(eg, 4 mmol·L−1 for the OBLA) depend on variables such as
nutrition and glycogen stores,26,27 site of blood acquisition,28 or
training status.21 To avoid the subjective determination and to
overcome the inter- and intraindividual differences in the lactate
kinetics, in the present study, we determined the LT through the
Dmax method,10 which is reliable and correlated with other
physiological markers such as the ventilatory thresholds or the
maximal lactate steady state, presenting a strong concordance
with the latter.10,12,29,30 This marker is also related to performance
in efforts lasting 20 to 90 minutes,11,12,31–33 having been reported
as a better predictor of performance than the OBLA.11,31,34,35
However, the main criticism against the Dmax method is its
dependence on the initial and final lactate and workload points.9
To minimize this limitation, we determined the Dmax using an
exponential regression instead of a polynomial one because it is
less influenced by the location of the coordinate points, presents a
stronger correlation with performance measures, and better de-
scribes the physiological lactate response to exercise.4,5 Different
LT markers such as the modified36 or standardized Dmax37 could
have also been an optimal approach to this problem, and we
cannot discard a different relationship between the FTP and the
LT depending on the analyzed LT marker.
It must be highlighted that, in the present study, the FTP–LT
relationship was analyzed at a specific moment, but we did not
determine the sensitivity of FTP to identify changes in the LT as a
consequence of fatigue or training. Future research should
address if the FTP can be used to indirectly assess training-
induced adaptations along the season. Moreover, the relationship
between the FTP and the LT could also be affected by the inherent
variability of performance. To account for this limitation, in this
case, we used a constant-duration test, which has proven more
reliable than time-to-exhaustion protocols.38 Specifically, the
mean power output obtained during a 20-minute time trial
such as the one performed here has proven highly reliable in
TC (ICC = .98).12
Practical Applications
The assessment of the LT is useful to analyze fitness changes and
also for training prescription, but it requires laboratory tests for its
determination, and therefore, its regular use is difficult for ordi-
nary athletes. In this study, we show that the FTP based on a 20-
minute field test can be used for the indirect estimation of the LT
and consequently for the assessment of the endurance fitness
level. Nevertheless, caution should be taken when using the FTP
interchangeably with the LT without attending to the athletes’
training status, whereas in TC (PPO > 4.5 W·kg−1), the FTP
showed a good agreement with the LT, and in RC (PPO <
4.5 W·kg−1), P20 yielded a more accurate result. Future studies
should analyze the validity and sensitivity of the FTP for the
assessment of changes in the LT.

Conclusions
The present study shows a very strong correlation between the FTP
and the LT. However, although there were overall trivial and
nonsignificant differences between the FTP and the LT, the
agreement between both markers depended on the individuals’
fitness status. Thus, whereas in TC, the FTP could be a practical
surrogate of the LT, and in RC, the FTP could underestimate it.
Acknowledgments
The work of P.L.V. is supported by a predoctoral contract granted by the
University of Alcalá (FPI2016). J.S.M. is supported by a predoctoral
contract granted by Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport (FPU14/
03435). The authors gratefully acknowledge all the participants. We also
thank Carlos Molina for his technical help during the experiments and
Gabriel Hernando from ZitaSport for contributing to the original concep-
tion of this research.
References
1. Beneke R, Leithäuser RM, Ochentel O. Blood lactate diagnostics in
exercise testing and training. Int J Sports Physiol Perform.
2011;6(1):8–24. PubMed ID: 21487146 doi:10.1123/ijspp.6.1.8
2. Allen H, Coggan A. Training and Racing With a Power Meter.
Boulder, CO: Velopress; 2006.
3. Sanders D, Abt G, Hesselink M, Myers T, Akubat I. Methods of
monitoring training load and their relationships to changes in fitness
and performance in competitive road cyclists. Int J Sports Physiol
Perform. 2017;12(5):668–675. PubMed ID: 28095061 doi:10.1123/
ijspp.2016-0454
4. Machado FA, Nakamura FY, De Moraes SM. Influence of regression
model and incremental test protocol on the relationship between
lactate threshold using the maximal-deviation method and perfor-
mance in female runners. J Sports Sci. 2012;30(12):1267–1274.
PubMed ID: 22775431 doi:10.1080/02640414.2012.702424
5. Santos-Concejero J, Tucker R, Granados C, et al. Influence of
regression model and initial intensity of an incremental test on the
relationship between the lactate threshold estimated by the maximal-
deviation method and running performance. J Sports Sci. 2014;
32(9):853–859. PubMed ID: 24479420 doi:10.1080/02640414.
2013.862844
6. De Pauw K, Roelands B, Cheung SS, De Geus B, Rietjens G,
Meeusen R. Guidelines to classify subject groups in sport-science
research. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2013;8(2):111–122. PubMed
ID: 23428482 doi:10.1123/ijspp.8.2.111
7. Arratibel Imaz I, Garcia Elorza I. Comparación de diferentes med-
idores de potencia para el entrenamiento en el ciclismo. Arch Med del
Deport. 2010;27(139):367–370.
8. Gardner AS, Stephens S, Martin DT, Lawton E, Lee H, Jenkins D.
Accuracy of SRM and power tap power monitoring systems for
bicycling. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004;36(7):1252–1258. PubMed
ID: 15235334 doi:10.1249/01.MSS.0000132380.21785.03
9. Bentley DJ, Newell J, Bishop D. Incremental exercise test design and
analysis: implications for performance diagnostics in endurance
athletes. Sport Med. 2007;37(7):575–586. doi:10.2165/00007256-
200737070-00002
10. Cheng B, Kuipers H, Snyder AC, Keizer HA, Jeukendrup A,
Hesselink M. A new approach for the determination of ventilatory
and lactate thresholds. Int J Sports Med. 1992;13(7):518–522.
PubMed ID: 1459746 doi:10.1055/s-2007-1021309
(Ahead of Print)
Functional Threshold Power and Lactate Threshold 5
11. Machado FA, De Moraes SM, Peserico CS, Mezzaroba PV, Higino
WP. The Dmax is highly related to performance in middle-aged
females. Int J Sports Med. 2011;32(9):672–676. PubMed ID:
21563034 doi:10.1055/s-0031-1275671
12. Nimmerichter A, Williams CA, Bachl N, Eston RG. Evaluation of a field
test to assess performance in elite cyclists. Int J Sports Med.
2010;31:160–166. PubMed ID: 20221996 doi:10.1055/s-0029-1243222
13. Hopkins W, Marshall SW, Batterham AM, Hanin J. Progressive
statistics for studies in sports medicine and exercise science. Med Sci
Sports Exerc. 2009;41(1):3–13. PubMed ID: 19092709 doi:10.1249/
MSS.0b013e31818cb278
14. Miller MC. Validity of using functional threshold power and inter-
mittent power to predict cross-country mountain bike race outcome.
J Sci Cycl. 2014;3(1):16–20.
15. Fell JW. The modified D-max is a valid lactate threshold measure-
ment in veteran cyclists. J Sci Med Sport. 2008;11(5):460–463.
PubMed ID: 17855166 doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2007.07.012
16. Klika RJ, Alderdice MS, Kvale JJ, Kearney JT. Efficacy of cycling
training based on a power field test. J Strength Cond Res. 2007;
21(1):265–269. PubMed ID: 17313274 doi:10.1519/00124278-
200702000-00047
17. Gavin TP, Van Meter JB, Brophy PM, Dubis GS, Potts KN, Hickner
RC. Comparison of a field-based test to estimate functional threshold
power and power output at lactate threshold. J Strength Cond Res.
2012;26(2):416–421. PubMed ID: 22233784 doi:10.1519/JSC.
0b013e318220b4eb
18. Sanders D, Taylor RJ, Myers T, Akubat I. A field-based cycling test to Q8
assess predictors of endurance performance and establishing training
zones [published online ahead of print March 25, 2017]. J Strength
Cond Res. doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000001910
19. Fukuba Y, Walsh ML, Morton RH, Cameron BJ, Kenny CT, Banister
EW. Effect of endurance training on blood lactate clearance after
maximal exercise. J Sports Sci. 1999;17(3):239–248. PubMed ID:
10362391 doi:10.1080/026404199366145
20. Putman CT, Jones NL, Hultman E, et al. Effects of short-term
submaximal training in humans on muscle metabolism in exercise.
Am J Physiol. 1998;275(1):E132–E139. doi:10.1152/ajpendo.1998.
275.1.E132
21. Santos-concejero J, Irazusta J, Zabala-lili J, Gil S. Time to exhaustion
at the onset of blood lactate accumulation in runners with different
athletic ability. Rev Bras Med do Esporte. 2013;19(4):297–302.
doi:10.1590/S1517-86922013000400014
22. Tesarz J, Schuster AK, Hartmann M, Gerhardt A, Eich W. Pain
perception in athletes compared to normally active controls: a sys-
tematic review with meta-analysis. Pain. 2012;153(6):1253–1262.
PubMed ID: 22607985 doi:10.1016/j.pain.2012.03.005
23. Astokorki AH, Mauger AR. Tolerance of exercise-induced pain at a
fixed rating of perceived exertion predicts time trial cycling perfor-
mance. Scand J Med Sci Sport. 2017;27(3):309–317. doi:10.1111/
sms.12659
24. Marcora SM, Staiano W. The limit to exercise tolerance in humans:
mind over muscle? Eur J Appl Physiol. 2010;109(4):763–770.
PubMed ID: 20221773 doi:10.1007/s00421-010-1418-6
25. Faude O, Kindermann W, Meyer T. Lactate threshold concepts: how
valid are they? Sports Med. 2009;39(6):469–490. PubMed ID:
19453206 doi:10.2165/00007256-200939060-00003
26. Yoshida T. Effect of dietary modifications on lactate threshold and
onset of blood lactate accumulation during incremental exercise. Eur
J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1984;53(3):200–205. PubMed ID:
6542853 doi:10.1007/BF00776590
27. Blomstrand E, Saltin B. Effect of muscle glycogen on glucose, lactate
and amino acid metabolism during exercise and recovery in human
6 Valenzuela et al
subjects. J Physiol. 1999;514(1):293–302. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7793.
1999.293af.x
28. Foxdal P, Sjödin A, Ostman B, Sjödin B. The effect of different blood
sampling sites and analyses on the relationship between exercise
intensity and 4.0 mmol·l−1 blood lactate concentration. Eur J Appl
Physiol Occup Physiol. 1991;63(1):52–54. PubMed ID: 1915332
doi:10.1007/BF00760801
29. Arratibel I, Calleja-González J, Emparanza JI, Terrados N, Mjaanes
JM, Ostojic SM. Lack of concordance amongst measurements of
individual anaerobic threshold and maximal lactate steady state on a
cycle ergometer. Phys Sportsmed. 2016;44(1):34–45. doi:10.1080/
00913847.2016.1122501
30. Czuba M, Zaje˛c A, Cholewa J, Poprze˛cki S, Waśkiewicz Z, Mikołajec
K. Lactate threshold (D-max method) and maximal lactate steady
state in cyclists. J Hum Kinet. 2009;21(1):49–56. doi:10.
2478/v10078-09-0006-5
31. Nicholson RM, Sleivert GG. Indices of lactate threshold and their
relationship with 10-km running velocity. Med Sci Sports Exerc.
2001;33(2):339–343. PubMed ID: 11224827 doi:10.1097/00005768-
200102000-00026
32. Bentley DJ, Mcnaughton LR, Thompson D, Vleck VE, Batterham
AM. Peak power output, the lactate threshold, and time trial perfor-
mance in cyclists. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2001;33(12):2077–2081.
PubMed ID: 11740302 doi:10.1097/00005768-200112000-00016
(Ahead of Print)
View publication stats
33. McNaughton LR, Roberts S, Bentley DJ. The relationship among
peak power output, lactate threshold, and short-distance cycling
performance: effects of incremental exercise test design. J Strength
Cond Res. 2006;20(1):157–161. PubMed ID: 16506862 doi:10.1519/
R-15914.1
34. Bishop D, Jenkins DG, Mackinnon LT. The relationship between
plasma lactate parameters, Wpeak and 1-h cycling performance in
women. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1998;30(8):1270–1275. PubMed ID:
9710868 doi:10.1097/00005768-199808000-00014
35. Bishop D, Jenkins DG, McEniery M, Carey MF. Relationship
between plasma lactate parameters and muscle characteristics in
female cyclists. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000;32(6):1088–1093.
PubMed ID: 10862534 doi:10.1097/00005768-200006000-00008
36. Fabre N, Balestreri F, Pellegrini B, Schena F. The modified D-max
method is reliable to predict the second ventilatory threshold in elite
cross-country skiers. J Strength Cond Res. 2010;24(6):1546–1552.
PubMed ID: 20508457 doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181dc450a
37. Chalmers S, Esterman A, Eston R, Norton K. Standardisation of the
D-max method for calculating the second lactate threshold. Int J
Sports Physiol Perform. 2015;10(7):921–926. PubMed ID:
25710184 doi:10.1123/ijspp.2014-0537
38. Currell K, Jeukendrup AE. Validity, reliability and sensitivity of
measures of sport performance. Sport Med. 2008;38(4):297–316.
doi:10.2165/00007256-200838040-00003