Volume 15, Issue 13 (9-2017)                   jsmt 2017, 15(13): 1-7 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Saleh V, Sadeghi H, Shams najafabadi P, Rezaeian M R, Vali zadeh H. Compare the profile of anthropometric, somatotype and body composition between novice and professional 6 to 8 years old gymnasts. jsmt. 2017; 15 (13) :1-7
URL: http://jsmt.khu.ac.ir/article-1-208-en.html
Abstract:   (646 Views)
The aim of this study was to compare the profile of anthropometric, somatotype and body composition between novice and professional 6 to 8 years old gymnasts. A total of 40 gymnasts in tow group (20 novice gymnasts and 20 professional gymnasts) participated in this study. A total of 17 anthropometric, somatotype and body composition variables were recorded of each subject. The tools used in this study are: questionnaires (individual information and general health evaluation), chronometer, band meter, and movable weight scale, stadiometer, sliding calliper and somatotype software. In ferential and descriptive statistics and independent T test were used to analyze the obtained data. The level of significance was 0.05. There were significant differences in skinfold percentage (triceps, Supraspinatus and calf), total hand length, hip and calf, circumferences, BMI, endomorph and ectomorph between tow group) p<0.05). From an anthropometric stand point, 6 to 8 years old is a lowest and best age for select and talent identification. According to the results, between two groups, professional gymnasts exhibited lower BMI, circumferences (hip and calf), skinfolds, endomorphy and more total hand length, mesomorphy and ectomorphy than nivice gymnasts. On average, professional and novice gymnasts were in ectomorph-mesomorph and endomorph-mesomorph status respectively.
Full-Text [PDF 959 kb]   (128 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special
Received: 2012/11/18 | Accepted: 2013/11/26 | Published: 2017/08/23

1. Bayios, A., Bergeles, N.K., Apostolidis, N.G., Noutsus, K.S., koskolou, M.D. (2006). Anthropmetive body composition and somatotype differences of Greek elite female basketball, volleyball and handball players, Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness. 46: 271-80.
2. Estoica, H. (1974). Measurment bodydimention of Japanese and American male elite gymnastic. The American College of Sports Medicine. 3: 76-81.
3. Gambetta, V. (1992). NSA Round, Talent identification by IAAF.1 (3): 19-23.
4. Singer, N. (1972). The Psychomotor Domain Movement Behavior. U.S.A Philadelphia.
5. Zuniga, J., Housh, T.J., Camic, C.L., Mielke, M., Hendrix, C.R., Johnson, G.O., Housh, D.J., Schmidt, R.J. (2011). Yearly changes in the anthropometric dimensions of female high school gymnasts, Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 25: 124-28.
6. O' Hava, R. (2007) Ley vesistance Training: Effeets upon vo2 peak and skeletal muscle myoplasticity in weight lifters. Exercise Physiology On Line. 5: 17-27.
7. Furlan, V. (2006). Anthropometric study of adolescents rhythmic gymnasts. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness. ¬5: 84-89.
8. Rich, P., Fulton, A. (1992) Physical and functional characteristics of highly trained young male gymnasts. Human Movement Studies. 3: 88-97.
9. Pienaar, A.E., Van, D. (1988). The influence of participation in a nine year old girl. Research in Sport Physical Education Recreation. 3: 34-42.
10. Emma, M., Laing, A. (2002). Prospective study of bone mass and body composition in female adolescent gymnasts, The Journal Pediatrics. 2: 211-16.

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
Write the security code in the box

© 2015 All Rights Reserved | Scientific Journals Management System

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb