Limits...
Anthropometric and Three-Compartment Body Composition Differences between Super League and Championship Rugby League Players: Considerations for the 2015 Season and Beyond.

Jones B, Till K, Barlow M, Lees M, O'Hara JP, Hind K - PLoS ONE (2015)

Bottom Line: No significant differences in age, stature or body mass were observed.SL forwards and backs had relatively less soft tissue fat (17.5 ± 3.7 and 14.8 ± 3.6 vs. 21.4 ± 4.3 and 20.8 ± 3.8%), greater BMC (4,528 ± 443 and 4,230 ± 447 vs. 4,302 ± 393 and 3,971 ± 280 g), greater trunk lean mass (37.3 ± 3.0 and 35.3 ± 3.8 vs. 34.9 ± 32.3 and 32.3 ± 2.6 kg) and less trunk fat mass (8.5 ± 2.7 and 6.2 ± 2.1 vs. 10.7 ± 2.8 and 9.5 ± 2.9 kg) than RLC forwards and backs.To reduce this discrepancy, some RLC players should reduce fat mass and increase lean mass, which may be of benefit for the 2015 season and beyond.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Research Institute for Sport, Physical Activity and Leisure, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom.

ABSTRACT
Super League (SL) and Championship (RLC) rugby league players will compete against each other in 2015 and beyond. To identify possible discrepancies, this study compared the anthropometric profile and body composition of current SL (full-time professional) and RLC (part-time semi-professional) players using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). A cross-sectional design involved DXA scans on 67 SL (n=29 backs, n=38 forwards) and 46 RLC (n=20 backs, n=26 forwards) players during preseason. A one-way ANOVA was used to compare age, stature, body mass, soft tissue fat percentage, bone mineral content (BMC), total and regional (i.e., arms, legs and trunk) fat and lean mass between SL forwards, SL backs, RLC forwards and RLC backs. No significant differences in age, stature or body mass were observed. SL forwards and backs had relatively less soft tissue fat (17.5 ± 3.7 and 14.8 ± 3.6 vs. 21.4 ± 4.3 and 20.8 ± 3.8%), greater BMC (4,528 ± 443 and 4,230 ± 447 vs. 4,302 ± 393 and 3,971 ± 280 g), greater trunk lean mass (37.3 ± 3.0 and 35.3 ± 3.8 vs. 34.9 ± 32.3 and 32.3 ± 2.6 kg) and less trunk fat mass (8.5 ± 2.7 and 6.2 ± 2.1 vs. 10.7 ± 2.8 and 9.5 ± 2.9 kg) than RLC forwards and backs. Observed differences may reflect selection based on favourable physical attributes, or training adaptations. To reduce this discrepancy, some RLC players should reduce fat mass and increase lean mass, which may be of benefit for the 2015 season and beyond.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

The regions of interest to enable the appropriate cuts according to the manufacturer’s instructions.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4519266&req=5

pone.0133188.g001: The regions of interest to enable the appropriate cuts according to the manufacturer’s instructions.

Mentions: One skilled technologist led and analysed all scans following the manufacturer’s guidelines for patient positioning. The regions of interest were manually placed to enable the appropriate cuts according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The regions of interest are illustrated in Fig 1. Defined regions were for the arms, legs and trunk. The appendicular regions of interest for the arms and legs were defined by cut lines positioned proximally at the coracoid process and at the superior iliac crest and lower ramus respectively. The pelvic region was defined through region of interest cuts, through the femoral neck. The trunk region included the pelvis, abdomen and chest. Scan analysis was performed using the Lunar Encore software (Version 15.0). The machine’s calibration was checked and passed on a daily basis using the GE Lunar calibration hydroxyapatite and epoxy resin phantom. There was no significant drift in calibration for the study period. Local precision (test-re-test) values for our Centre (in healthy adult subjects, aged 34.6 years) are 0.8% for total fat mass, 0.5% for total lean mass, and 0.6% for total BMC and bone mineral density (BMD) [21,22]. Regional precision values for our Centre have also been published elsewhere [22].


Anthropometric and Three-Compartment Body Composition Differences between Super League and Championship Rugby League Players: Considerations for the 2015 Season and Beyond.

Jones B, Till K, Barlow M, Lees M, O'Hara JP, Hind K - PLoS ONE (2015)

The regions of interest to enable the appropriate cuts according to the manufacturer’s instructions.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4519266&req=5

pone.0133188.g001: The regions of interest to enable the appropriate cuts according to the manufacturer’s instructions.
Mentions: One skilled technologist led and analysed all scans following the manufacturer’s guidelines for patient positioning. The regions of interest were manually placed to enable the appropriate cuts according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The regions of interest are illustrated in Fig 1. Defined regions were for the arms, legs and trunk. The appendicular regions of interest for the arms and legs were defined by cut lines positioned proximally at the coracoid process and at the superior iliac crest and lower ramus respectively. The pelvic region was defined through region of interest cuts, through the femoral neck. The trunk region included the pelvis, abdomen and chest. Scan analysis was performed using the Lunar Encore software (Version 15.0). The machine’s calibration was checked and passed on a daily basis using the GE Lunar calibration hydroxyapatite and epoxy resin phantom. There was no significant drift in calibration for the study period. Local precision (test-re-test) values for our Centre (in healthy adult subjects, aged 34.6 years) are 0.8% for total fat mass, 0.5% for total lean mass, and 0.6% for total BMC and bone mineral density (BMD) [21,22]. Regional precision values for our Centre have also been published elsewhere [22].

Bottom Line: No significant differences in age, stature or body mass were observed.SL forwards and backs had relatively less soft tissue fat (17.5 ± 3.7 and 14.8 ± 3.6 vs. 21.4 ± 4.3 and 20.8 ± 3.8%), greater BMC (4,528 ± 443 and 4,230 ± 447 vs. 4,302 ± 393 and 3,971 ± 280 g), greater trunk lean mass (37.3 ± 3.0 and 35.3 ± 3.8 vs. 34.9 ± 32.3 and 32.3 ± 2.6 kg) and less trunk fat mass (8.5 ± 2.7 and 6.2 ± 2.1 vs. 10.7 ± 2.8 and 9.5 ± 2.9 kg) than RLC forwards and backs.To reduce this discrepancy, some RLC players should reduce fat mass and increase lean mass, which may be of benefit for the 2015 season and beyond.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Research Institute for Sport, Physical Activity and Leisure, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom.

ABSTRACT
Super League (SL) and Championship (RLC) rugby league players will compete against each other in 2015 and beyond. To identify possible discrepancies, this study compared the anthropometric profile and body composition of current SL (full-time professional) and RLC (part-time semi-professional) players using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). A cross-sectional design involved DXA scans on 67 SL (n=29 backs, n=38 forwards) and 46 RLC (n=20 backs, n=26 forwards) players during preseason. A one-way ANOVA was used to compare age, stature, body mass, soft tissue fat percentage, bone mineral content (BMC), total and regional (i.e., arms, legs and trunk) fat and lean mass between SL forwards, SL backs, RLC forwards and RLC backs. No significant differences in age, stature or body mass were observed. SL forwards and backs had relatively less soft tissue fat (17.5 ± 3.7 and 14.8 ± 3.6 vs. 21.4 ± 4.3 and 20.8 ± 3.8%), greater BMC (4,528 ± 443 and 4,230 ± 447 vs. 4,302 ± 393 and 3,971 ± 280 g), greater trunk lean mass (37.3 ± 3.0 and 35.3 ± 3.8 vs. 34.9 ± 32.3 and 32.3 ± 2.6 kg) and less trunk fat mass (8.5 ± 2.7 and 6.2 ± 2.1 vs. 10.7 ± 2.8 and 9.5 ± 2.9 kg) than RLC forwards and backs. Observed differences may reflect selection based on favourable physical attributes, or training adaptations. To reduce this discrepancy, some RLC players should reduce fat mass and increase lean mass, which may be of benefit for the 2015 season and beyond.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus