Abstract
primary aim of this single cross-sectional study was to identify the physical characteristics (anthropometric, somatotype, body composition) of orienteer- ing athletes (OAs) and to compare them with nutrition knowledge (NK) and physical activity level (PAL).Methods: Data were collected from 58 subjects of seven countries, including Angola (n= 1), Brazil (n= 5), Poland (n= 1), Portugal (n= 26), South Africa (n= 1), Spain (n= 22) and Sweden (n= 2). The subjects included 10 elite (E) female (F) OAs [age:25.5±6.4 years , body mass: 59.5±7.7 kg, stature: 168.1±6.5 cm, body mass index (BMI): 21.0±1.9 kg/m 2 ], 13 E male (M) OAs (age: 24.3±5.0 years, body mass:65.0±5.5 kg , stature: 175.1±6.0 cm, BMI: 21.3±2.2 kg/m 2 ), 18 non-elite (NE) FOAs (age:41.7±10.3 years ,
(n= 22) and Sweden (n= 2). The subjects included 10 elite (E) female (F) OAs [age:25.5±6.4 years , body mass: 59.5±7.7 kg, stature: 168.1±6.5 cm, body mass index (BMI): 21.0±1.9 kg/m 2 ], 13 E male (M) OAs (age: 24.3±5.0 years, body mass:65.0±5.5 kg , stature: 175.1±6.0 cm, BMI: 21.3±2.2 kg/m 2 ), 18 non-elite (NE) FOAs (age:41.7±10.3 years , body mass: 60.6±8.5 kg, stature: 161.3±11.7 cm, BMI: 23.4±3.7 kg/m 2 ), and 17 NEMOAs (age: 37.2±14.6 years, body mass: 71.5±14.2 kg, stature: 174.0±8.8 cm, BMI: 23.6±4.1 kg/m 2 ). The participants were selected to ensure a diverse and representative sample of international-level orienteering athletes. Measure- ments were taken at two IOF world ranking events, the “Portugal “O” Meeting (POM)” and the “35 ◦ Trofeo Internacional Murcia Costa Cálida”, where only top-ranked orienteers compete. The selected participants from these seven countries were among the registered athletes in these international competitions. The OAs were measured according to the guide- lines of the International Society for the Advancement of Kinanthropometry (ISAK). NK was evaluated using the updated Abridged Nutrition for Sport Knowledge Questionnaire (A—NSKQ). PAL was assessed using the short version of the self-reported International Physical Activity Questionnaire—Short Form (IPAQ—SF).Results: The percentage of body fat (p< 0.01) in MOAs was significantly lower than in FOAs. Endomorphy (p= 0.037) and mesomorphy (p= 0.025) in EOAs were significantly lower than in NEOAs, but ectomorphy (p= 0.038) was significantly higher. EMOAs are ectomorphic mesomorphs, while NEMOAs are balanced mesomorphs, EFOAs are central, and NEFOAs are endomorphic mesomorphs. Significant differences (p< 0.01) were also observed in sports nutrition knowledge (SNK) among EOAs and NEOAs, with the former group achieving a higher percentage of correct responses. In the case of total nutritional knowledge (TNK), EOAs of both sexes scored significantly higher (p= 0.043) than their NEOA counterparts. A significant negative corre- lation was also observed between percentage of body fat (%BF) and metabolic equivalent Nutrients2025,17, 714 https://doi.org/10.3390/nu17040714
sexes scored significantly higher (p= 0.043) than their NEOA counterparts. A significant negative corre- lation was also observed between percentage of body fat (%BF) and metabolic equivalent Nutrients2025,17, 714 https://doi.org/10.3390/nu17040714
Nutrients2025,17, 714 2 of 17 (MET) in minutes per week (min/week) (r=−0.39,p= 0.038), bone mass (BM) and MET- min/week (r=−0.40,p= 0.033), and endomorphy and SNK (r=−0.38 ,p= 0.045) in FOAs. Among MOAs, the most significant findings included a negative correlation between age and METmin/week (r=−0.49,p= 0.010), kilocalorie (kcal) per week (r=−0.46,p= 0.016), and SNK (r=−0.40,p= 0.029).Conclusions: The key findings indicate that EOAs have lower BF percentages and higher NK scores compared to NEOAs. These results on the physical characteristics of OAs and the score of PAL and classification of NK can be useful to coaches and sports scientists to improve orienteer’s performance. Keywords:anthropometry; body composition; somatotype; endurance athletes; international competition; training frequency 1. Introduction Orienteering is described as a cross-country type event, with rules according to the International Orienteering Federation (IOF) [1], which manages four orienteering disci- plines: (1) foot orienteering (FootO), (2) mountain bike or MTB (MTB orienteering), (3) ski orienteering (SkiO), and (4) trail orienteering (TrailO). The physiological demands associated with FootO are comparable to those placed on long-distance runners, that is, orienteers’ performance predominantly relies on the aerobic component (which is required to maintain speed, proper technique, and mental focus), interspersed with bouts of anaerobic activity/capacity (required when energy demands are especially great, such as when running on steep uphill terrain, as well as when sprint- ing towards the finish) [2,3]. Given these conditions, it is hypothesized that orienteers experience high energy expenditure and substantial fluid and electrolyte losses during activity. Consequently, an appropriate physical profile and comprehensive nutritional support are essential for performance [4]. On the other hand, recent research has delved into the physiological and anthropometric traits of orienteering athletes (OAs), revealing that medalists at the World Masters Orienteering Championships (WMOCs) exhibit body mass index (BMI) values akin to those of middle-distance runners, with female athletes dis- playing significantly lower BMI values compared to their male counterparts [5]. Moreover, orienteers typically possess a balanced mesomorph somatotype and exhibit high levels of energy expenditure [6]. Additionally, regarding coordination abilities, FootO athletes demonstrate superior balance relative to track and field athletes [7]. Furthermore, mental fatigue induced by
(BMI) values akin to those of middle-distance runners, with female athletes dis- playing significantly lower BMI values compared to their male counterparts [5]. Moreover, orienteers typically possess a balanced mesomorph somatotype and exhibit high levels of energy expenditure [6]. Additionally, regarding coordination abilities, FootO athletes demonstrate superior balance relative to track and field athletes [7]. Furthermore, mental fatigue induced by a 30 min cognitive task does not significantly impair the performance or physiological responses of orienteers, although a slight increase in race time has been noted [8]. These findings underscore the unique physical and cognitive demands of orien- teering, indicating that success in this sport necessitates a blend of endurance, coordination, and mental resilience [3,4]. Despite orienteering’s widespread popularity across 76 countries, including Portugal and Spain, comprehensive studies that could contribute to optimizing the performance of younger elite (E) and non-elite (NE) OAs are still limited. This scarcity extends to research involving measurable human body features, which should be standardized according to the guidelines of the International Society for the Advancement of Kinanthropometry (ISAK) [9]. Additionally, there is a lack of studies assessing the physical activity level (PAL) and nutritional knowledge (NK) of these athletes [10–12]. A scoping review by Hopper et al. [13] emphasized that gaps in NK among athletes can lead to suboptimal dietary practices, which may hinder performance and recovery. In this sense, NK can help athletes meet recommendations for optimal energy availability and carbohydrate intake, which are
Nutrients2025,17, 714 3 of 17 crucial for maintaining performance in endurance sports [14,15]. Moreover, assessing the PAL in athletes is essential for optimizing sports performance, preventing injuries, and ensuring an appropriate training prescription. A study evaluated the PAL and energy expenditure of young athletes in aerobic sports and reported that the high level of PA observed in athletes should be considered when prescribing training to prevent overload injuries [16]. Thus, to the best of our knowledge, no studies have investigated these vari- ables in orienteering sports. Addressing this knowledge gap could significantly improve the design of exercise/training and diet programs, as well as facilitate the monitoring of both acute and chronic effects of interventions. These elements are crucial for achieving excellence in orienteering [17]. The aims of this study were as follows: 1. To describe the anthropometric characteristics, body composition (BC), somatotype, NK, and PAL of elite (E) and non-elite (NE) OAs; 2. To explore the associations between BC and somatotype according to NK and PAL of E and NE OAs. 2. Materials and Methods 2.1. Ethical Approval This project was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Human Kinetics, University of Lisbon (Code: 13/2022) in May 2022. Informed consent was obtained from all participants included in this study. All related procedures were conducted in accordance with the standard of ethics outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki [18]. 2.2. Study Design and Subjects This study was conducted as a single cross-sectional study during two competitions in Portugal and Spain. A total of 58 international-level E and NE OAs of seven countries, including Angola (n= 1), Brazil (n= 5), Poland (n= 1), Portugal (n= 26), South Africa (n= 1), Spain (n= 22), and Sweden (n= 2), were included in this study [30 males (M) and 28 females (F); (age 41.7±10.3 years: NEFOA, 25.5±6.4 years: EFOA,37.2±14.6 years : NEMOA, 24.3±5.0 years: EMOA)]. The main inclusion criteria for OAs were set as follows: (1) valid license in the Portuguese Orienteering Federation (FPO) [19], Spanish Orienteering Federation (FEDO) [20], or IOF [1]; (2) being in the age group of 18 to 65
this study [30 males (M) and 28 females (F); (age 41.7±10.3 years: NEFOA, 25.5±6.4 years: EFOA,37.2±14.6 years : NEMOA, 24.3±5.0 years: EMOA)]. The main inclusion criteria for OAs were set as follows: (1) valid license in the Portuguese Orienteering Federation (FPO) [19], Spanish Orienteering Federation (FEDO) [20], or IOF [1]; (2) being in the age group of 18 to 65 years; and (3) without metabolic disease or any disease that could affect body fat and not having taken hormone treatment or corticoids in the three months prior to the anthropometric assessment, except for contraceptives. The sample size (n) was calculated according to the population (N) of 2500 OAs of different nationalities, considering the sum of registered participants in official, annual, and internationally renowned events in Portugal and Spain. Thus, a confidence level of 95% was adopted for the sampling calculation, as well as the associated critical value of 1.96 (Z-score),±10% error margin, and a population with homogeneous features (p= 0.8) [21], which show an “n” of 61 subjects. An a priori power analysis in terms of the omnibus test (ANOVA) was performed with a significant level of 0.05, a large effect size (0.4), and a power of 0.80 for four groups (2 genders and 2 elite classes), which show an “n” of 18 subjects for each group. A total of 45 athletes were approached, always before the competition, in each location, and the consent response rate was 25 and 33 in Spain and Portugal, respectively. Normally, the refusals occurred due to the athletes’ alleged needs to concentrate for the competition; admittedly, in orienteering, the psychological component is significant [17]. The rankings of the orienteers, separated by gender, were obtained from the IOF/World Ranking [1], accessed on 20 February 2023. An OA was classified as “NE” if they were not listed in the aforementioned rankings.
Nutrients2025,17, 714 4 of 17 2.3. Variables and Measures Sociodemographic data (i.e., date and country of birth, sex), training data (i.e., practice, frequency, and quantity), and NK and PAL data were collected from the orienteers using an online electronic scheme built on Google Forms© by the researchers. For all orienteers, anthropometric data were obtained during a single day, between 6:30 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., at two competitions in 2023: “Portugal “O” Meeting (POM)”, organized by FPO [19], and “35 ◦ Trofeo Internacional Murcia Costa Cálida”, organized by the FEDO [20] and Orienteering Federation of the Region of Murcia (F.O.R.M.) [22]. Both competitions were IOF [1] world ranking events, valid for the international ranking, in which only the best orienteers in the world compete in the elite category, who must be included in this ranking in order to participate. We consider that the COVID-19 restrictions in 2023, the year in which the data was collected, did not affect the regular orienteering schedule or training patterns, which were normal. 2.4. Nutritional Knowledge Assessment To assess the NK of the OAs, especially the concepts related to sports nutrition, we used the updated Abridged Nutrition for Sport Knowledge Questionnaire (A-NSKQ) [11]. This instrument was validated for use with athletes of different nationalities, levels of competition, and sports [10,11]. The questionnaire is composed of multiple-choice ques- tions with three or four alternative answers and just one correct answer. The questionnaire contains 35 questions, divided into two subsections. The first section contains 11 ques- tions about general nutrition knowledge (GNK); the second section contains 24 questions specifically about sports nutrition (SNK). NK scores were expressed as percentages of correct answers obtained by the subjects in each subsection (GNK and SNK), and total nutritional knowledge (TNK) was obtained with the sum of the subsections. The level of knowledge was classified as poor (0–49%), average (50–65%), good (66–75%), and excellent (76–100%) [10]. The A—NSKQ has been shown to exhibit high construct validity (p< 0.001) with good test-to-test concordance (r= 0.80;p< 0.001) among athletes. From the original study, scores > 47% represent greater than average nutrition knowledge [10–12]. The
obtained with the sum of the subsections. The level of knowledge was classified as poor (0–49%), average (50–65%), good (66–75%), and excellent (76–100%) [10]. The A—NSKQ has been shown to exhibit high construct validity (p< 0.001) with good test-to-test concordance (r= 0.80;p< 0.001) among athletes. From the original study, scores > 47% represent greater than average nutrition knowledge [10–12]. The lan- guages used were English [23] and Spanish [24], official versions, and no cross-cultural adaptation was performed in any case. 2.5. Physical Activity Level Assessment The PAL was assessed based on the short version of the self-reported International Physical Activity Questionnaire—Short Form (IPAQ—SF), in two official versions [25], English and Spanish; therefore, there was no need for cross-cultural adaptation. This instrument, with validity and re-producibility tested in numerous countries [26], consists of eight open questions that allow for estimating the time spent per week, the last seven days of the assessment, on different PA domains (i.e., walking and physical effort from moderate to vigorous intensity) and physical inactivity (i.e., sitting). Considering that the IPAQ—SF data can also be used to estimate the score expressed as metabolic equivalent (MET), in minutes per week [25,27], the total PAL score was calculated by multiplying the METs recorded for each activity type, and the volume observed for each activity type was calculated by weighting its energy requirements: walking, 3.3 METs; moderate activity, 4.0 METs; and vigorous activity, 8.0 METs. The sum of products found for each PA type gave origin to the total PAL score (walking + moderate PA + vigorous PA = total PAL score) [25]. Values lower than 10 min of PA (per day) were not included in the calculation; they were re-coded to “zero” since scientific evidence indicates that PA sessions shorter than 10 min do not lead to health benefits [25]. Cases whose total PAL score exceeded 960 min (16 h per day) were considered outliers according to the IPAQ guidelines [28]; they
shorter than 10 min do not lead to health benefits [25]. Cases whose total PAL score exceeded 960 min (16 h per day) were considered outliers according to the IPAQ guidelines [28]; they
Nutrients2025,17, 714 5 of 17 were excluded from the analysis. Categorical and continuous IPAQ—SF data processing and analysis followed official guidelines [25]. The PAL were categorized in three levels: (1) “low”, the lowest, for those individuals who did not walk for at least 10 min, and those who did not moderate PA were considered low/inactive; (2) “moderate”, for any of the following criteria: three or more days of vigorous activity for at least 20 min per day, five or more days of moderate-intensity activity or walking for at least 30 min per day, or five or more days of any combination of walking, moderate-intensity, or vigorous intensity activities achieving a minimum of at least 600 MET—min/week; and (3) “high”, for any of the following two criteria: vigorous-intensity activity on at least 3 days and accumulating at least 1500 MET—min/week or seven or more days of any combination of walking, moderate-intensity, or vigorous intensity activities achieving a minimum of at least 3000 MET—min/week [25]. 2.6. Anthropometric Measurements The anthropometric variables of the subjects were measured according to the ISAK pro- tocol [9] by certified levels 3 and 4 Anthropometrists [29], who adopted hygienic–sanitary care against COVID-19 [30]. Twenty-six anthropometric variables were measured for each subject, namely, four basic measurements (body mass, stature, sitting height, arm span), nine skinfold thicknesses (pectoral, according to procedures described by the American Col- lege of Sports Medicine (ACSM) [31], triceps, subscapular, biceps, suprailiac, supraspinal, abdominal, front thigh and calf), nine circumferences (neck, relaxed and contracted arm, chest, waist, hip, thigh middle, calf, ankle), and four bone breadths (biepicondylar humerus, bi-styloid, biepicondylar femur, bimalleolar). Body mass was measured using a scale to the nearest 0.1 kg (Seca, model: 7601419004; Seca Gmbh & Co. KG, Hamburg, Germany), and stature and sitting height were measured using a stadiometer to the nearest 0.1 cm (Seca, model 2131721009; Seca Gmbh & Co. KG, Hamburg, Germany). Arm span was measured using a segmometer to the nearest 0.1 cm (Cescorf, Porto Alegre, Brazil). Circumferences were taken to the nearest 0.1 cm using a measuring tape (Rosscraft Innovations, Spokane, WA, USA). Bone breadths were
stature and sitting height were measured using a stadiometer to the nearest 0.1 cm (Seca, model 2131721009; Seca Gmbh & Co. KG, Hamburg, Germany). Arm span was measured using a segmometer to the nearest 0.1 cm (Cescorf, Porto Alegre, Brazil). Circumferences were taken to the nearest 0.1 cm using a measuring tape (Rosscraft Innovations, Spokane, WA, USA). Bone breadths were measured to the nearest 0.1 cm using a measuring small bone caliper (Rosscraft Innovations, Spokane, WA, USA), and skinfold thicknesses were measured to the nearest 0.5 mm using a calibrated caliper (Rosscraft Innovations, Spokane, WA, USA). Repeated measures for each parameter were collected to determine the tech- nical error of measurement (TEM) [32]. To mark the anthropometric reference points, a segmometer was used to the nearest 0.1 cm (Cescorf, Porto Alegre, Brazil), with the aid of a dermatographic pencil. BMI was calculated as body mass in kilograms divided by the square of stature in meters (kg/m 2 ) [33]. Body density (BD) was estimated by using specific equations for M [34] and F [35] athletes. BD was transformed into body fat (BF) percentage using equations specific for each sex published by the ACSM [31]. Bone mass (BM) and muscle mass (MM) were determined in kilograms (kg) through the methods of Martin [36] and Lee et al. [37], respectively. Anthropometric somatotyping was performed using the Heath and Carter method [38]. Further, individual somatotypes were plotted on a two-dimensional somatochart by calculating values ofX(ectomorphy−endomorphy) andY[2×mesomorphy−(endomorphy + ectomorphy)] coordinates: somatotype disper- sion distance (SDD) (distance between mean somatoplot and each individual somatotype, represented inYdistance units, that is, in terms of distances at theY-axis of a somatoplot), somatotype dispersion mean (SDM) (average of all the somatotype dispersion distances), somatotype attitudinal distance (SAD) (distance between any two somatopoints), and somatotype attitudinal mean (SAM) (average of the SADs of each somatopoint from the mean somatopoint). The last two are three-dimensional counterparts of the SDM [38].
Description
This study examines the relationship between body composition, somatotype, physical activity, and nutrition knowledge in orienteering athletes.