ABSTRACT
The lean body mass (LBM) components have been suggested as important predictors of anaerobic performance, which is highly involved in basketball. We explored with descriptive cross-sectional design the relationship between anaerobic performance and full molecular and cellular body composition profile in young male basketball players. Twenty-one players (age = 16.8 ± 1.6 years; body mass = 76.3 ± 15.7 kg, height = 189.3 ± 12.6 cm) were recruited, 11 elite and 10 local level. Participants were evaluated on multicomponent body composition [LBM, appendicular lean soft tissue (ALST), bone mineral content (BMC), total body water (TBW), intracellular water (ICW) and extracellular water (ECW)] and field-based anaerobic performance (vertical jump, linear sprint, and handgrip strength). The stepwise regression analyses adjusted for confounders showed significant relationships of whole-body and regional body composition components with handgrip and jump performance (P ≤ 0.03). Prediction models combining body composition variables assessed by bioimpedance analysis (BIA) and double-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) revealed that lean mass and hydration ratios (ICW/ECW and ECW/TBW) were strongly associated with jump performance (CMJ and CMJ25kg), independently of the competition level (P < 0.01). The novel finding in this study was that water quality (ICW/ECW) and water distribution (ECW/TBW, ICW) of total and regional LBM were the main predictors of vertical jump capacity in young basketball players.
Acknowledgments
We want to thank all the athletes, as well as the institutions involved.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Data availability statement
The data presented in this study are available within the article.
Author contributions
S.B-F. and E.A.C. designed the study and carried out data collection. L.C-G. prepared the data and performed the statistical analyses. J.C-G. and E.A.C. provided significant insights in basketball-related domains and methodological aspects, respectively. All authors collectively drafted the manuscript, critically interpreted the results, revised the manuscript for important intellectual content, and read and approved the final version of the manuscript.