Indian Journal of Science and Technology

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Analysis of Anthropometry, Body Composition and Performance Variables of Young Indian Athletes in Southern Region


Affiliations
1 Department of Physical Education and Sports Sciences, Annamalai University, Annamalainagar-608002, TN, India
 

The purpose of this study was to analyze the anthropometry and body composition associated with performance of university level male track and field athletes of South India. This study was conducted on 93 track and field athletes from South India, comprised of 22 sprinters (100&200 mts), mean age 19.5 years, height 172.1 cm and weight 68.2 kg, 20 middle distance runners (800&1500 mts), mean age 19 yrs, height 166.8 cm and weight 62.5 kg, 16 long distance runners (5000&10000 mts), mean age 18.7 years, height 167.2 cm and weight 62.1 kg, 20 throwers, (shot, discus&hammer throw), mean age 19 years, height 170.8 cm and weight 72.6 kg and jumpers (High, long&triple jump), mean age 18.3 years, height 169.9 cm and weight 64.1 kg. Besides height and weight, six skin folds (triceps, chest, subscapular, abdomen, suprailiac&calf), two bicondylar breadths (humerus&femur) and two girths (biceps&calf) were measured. Somatotype evaluations were made according to Carter and Heath (1990) method. BMI was calculated as body mass divided by square of height (kg/m2). The somatochart indicated that sprinters and middle distance runners are ectomorphic mesomorphs, long distance runners are mesomorph ectomorphs while throwers are endomorphic mesomorphs. The jumpers fell into the somatotype category of balanced mesomorphs. Among all groups body fat percent is lowest in sprinters (6.23±0.83%) and highest in throwers (7.38±0.85%). This was reflected in their endomorphic components which is lowest in sprinters (2.53±0.45) and highest in throwers (3.39±0.65). Ectomorphic component is highly marked in long distance runners (3.56±0.65) while mesomophy was highest in sprinters (4.31±0.91). Throwers have significantly higher values of skin folds than other groups. Compared to their overseas counterparts, the athletes of both track and field events in the present study exhibited greater endomorphic values. The present data will serve as a reference standard for the anthropometry and body composition of south Indian track and field athletes.

Keywords

Body Composition, Somatotype, Endomorphic, Ectomorphic, Mesomorphic, Anthropometric
User

  • Amatya DL (2009) Comparative study of somatotype of Nepalese sportsmen. Ind. J. Sports Sci. Physical Edu. 7(2), 21-26.

  • Battinelli T (2000) Physique, fitness, and performance, Boca Raton, Fla.: CRC Press. p:18.

  • Bloomfield J, Peter A. Fricker and Kenneth D. Fitch (1995) Can running injuries be effectively prevented? Sci. Med. Sports. 1, 161.

  • Brozek J, Grande F, Anderson JT and Keys A (1963) Denstometric analysis of body composition: Revision of some quantitative assumptions. Ann. New York Acad. Sci. 110,113-140.

  • Carter JEL (1984) Physical structure of Olympic athletes. Part II: Kinanthropometry of Olympic athletes. Med. Sports Sci. Karger Basel; NY.

  • Carter JEL and Heath BH (1990) Somatotyping: Development and application, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

  • Chatterjee S, Chatterjee P and Bandyopadhyay A (2006) Skinfold thickness, body fat percentage and body mass index in obese and non-obese Indian boys. Asia Pac. J. Clin. Nutr. 15, 232–235.

  • Fleck SJ (1983) Body composition of elite American athletes. Amer. J. Sports Med. 11 (6), 398-403.

  • Gore CJ (2000) Physiological tests for elite athletes. Champaign, IL. Human Kinetics.

  • Jackson AS and Pollock ML (1985) Practical assesment of body composition. Physican Sports Med. 5, 76–90.

  • Johnson BL and Nelson JK (1982) Practical measurement for evaluation in physical education. Surjeet Publication, Delhi- India. Pp.165–167.

  • Martin DE and Coe PE (1997) Better training for distance runners. Human Kinetics. USA.

  • Matkovic Br, Misigoj-Durakovic M, Matkovic B, Jankovic S, Ruzic L, Leko G and Kondric M (2003) Morphological differences of elite Croatian soccer players according to the team position. Coll. Antropol. 27 Suppl.1, pp.167-174.

  • Meltzer A, Mueller W, Annegers J, Grimes B and Albright D (1988) Weight history and hypertension. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 41, 867–874.

  • Ridder HD, Monyeki D, Amusa L, Toriola A, Wekesa M and Carter L (2000) Kinanthropometry in African sports: Body composition and somatotype of world class male African middle-distance, long-distance and marathon runners. ISAK Publication, Adelaide. pp. 37-52.

  • Shaver LG (1982) Essentials of exercise physiology, Surjiet Publ., Kamal Nagar, New Delhi. p.194.

  • Sinning W E (1996) Body composition in athletes. In: Human Body Composition. Human Kinetics. Roche AF, Heymsfield SB, Lohman TG (Eds.), Champaign, IL. pp. 257-269

  • Sodhi HS (1986) Skinfold pattern of top Indian athletes and sportsmen. In modern perspectives in physical education and sports sciences. Harnam Publications, New Delhi. p.53.

  • Tanner JM (1964). The physique of the Olympic athletes, Allen & Unwin, London.

  • Thorland, William C, Glen O. Johnson, Thomas G. Fagot, Gerald D. Tharp and Richard W Hammer (1981) Body composition and somatotype characteristics of Junior Olympic athletes. Med. Sci. Sports Exercise. 13(5), 332-338.

  • Vucetic V, Babic V, Sentija D and Nekic B (2005) Anthropometric and morphological characteristics of the runners, Milanovic, Dragan ; Prot, Franjo (ed). – Zagreb, Croatia: Faculty of Kinesiology. pp: 612-615.


Abstract Views: 747

PDF Views: 390




  • Analysis of Anthropometry, Body Composition and Performance Variables of Young Indian Athletes in Southern Region

Abstract Views: 747  |  PDF Views: 390

Authors

George Abraham
Department of Physical Education and Sports Sciences, Annamalai University, Annamalainagar-608002, TN, India

Abstract


The purpose of this study was to analyze the anthropometry and body composition associated with performance of university level male track and field athletes of South India. This study was conducted on 93 track and field athletes from South India, comprised of 22 sprinters (100&200 mts), mean age 19.5 years, height 172.1 cm and weight 68.2 kg, 20 middle distance runners (800&1500 mts), mean age 19 yrs, height 166.8 cm and weight 62.5 kg, 16 long distance runners (5000&10000 mts), mean age 18.7 years, height 167.2 cm and weight 62.1 kg, 20 throwers, (shot, discus&hammer throw), mean age 19 years, height 170.8 cm and weight 72.6 kg and jumpers (High, long&triple jump), mean age 18.3 years, height 169.9 cm and weight 64.1 kg. Besides height and weight, six skin folds (triceps, chest, subscapular, abdomen, suprailiac&calf), two bicondylar breadths (humerus&femur) and two girths (biceps&calf) were measured. Somatotype evaluations were made according to Carter and Heath (1990) method. BMI was calculated as body mass divided by square of height (kg/m2). The somatochart indicated that sprinters and middle distance runners are ectomorphic mesomorphs, long distance runners are mesomorph ectomorphs while throwers are endomorphic mesomorphs. The jumpers fell into the somatotype category of balanced mesomorphs. Among all groups body fat percent is lowest in sprinters (6.23±0.83%) and highest in throwers (7.38±0.85%). This was reflected in their endomorphic components which is lowest in sprinters (2.53±0.45) and highest in throwers (3.39±0.65). Ectomorphic component is highly marked in long distance runners (3.56±0.65) while mesomophy was highest in sprinters (4.31±0.91). Throwers have significantly higher values of skin folds than other groups. Compared to their overseas counterparts, the athletes of both track and field events in the present study exhibited greater endomorphic values. The present data will serve as a reference standard for the anthropometry and body composition of south Indian track and field athletes.

Keywords


Body Composition, Somatotype, Endomorphic, Ectomorphic, Mesomorphic, Anthropometric

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst%2F2010%2Fv3i12%2F29864