See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/259321633

Anthropometry, Somatotypes, and Aerobic Power in Ballet, Contemporary

Dance, and DanceSport

Article  in  Medical problems of performing artists · December 2013

Source: PubMed

CITATIONS READS
19 2,234

6 authors, including:

Helena Liiv Matthew Wyon

University of Tartu University of Wolverhampton
5 PUBLICATIONS   70 CITATIONS    146 PUBLICATIONS   1,856 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Meeli Saar Mäestu Jarek

University of Tartu University of Tartu
39 PUBLICATIONS   405 CITATIONS    136 PUBLICATIONS   1,964 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

IUT20-58 Physical performance and health: adaptational and age-related aspects View project

Estonian Children Personality Behaviour and Health Study View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Matthew Wyon on 23 January 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Anthropometry, Somatotypes, and Aerobic Power in
Ballet, Contemporary Dance, and DanceSport
Helena Liiv, PhD,1 Matthew A. Wyon, PhD,2,3 Toivo Jürimäe, PhD,1 Meeli Saar, PhD,1
Jarek Mäestu, PhD,1 and Jaak Jürimäe, PhD1
This study compared anthropometric variables, somatotypes,
and aerobic capacity between three groups of dancers: classical
ballet dancers (M 33, F 56), contemporary dancers (M 28, F
109), and dancesport dancers (M 30, F 30). The assumption
was that different functional requirements should produce dif-
ferences in the anthropometric and aerobic capacity variables
among the three groups. Anthropometric data for body mass
index (BMI) and somatotypes were measured. Body fat per-
centage was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry.
Maximal oxygen consumption and aerobic power were meas-
ured during an incremental treadmill test until exhaustion.
Dancesport athletes were taller compared with same gender
contemporary dancers (p<0.05). Female ballet dancers had a
lower body mass and BMI compared with their contemporary
dance and dancesport equivalents (p<0.001). There was signif-
icant difference between dance styles in endomorphy (F2,221 =
8.773, p<0.001) and mesomorphy (F2,221 = 21.458, p<0.001)
scores. Dancesport dancers had significantly greater VO2max
values (p<0.01). It was concluded that female contemporary
dancers are generally more muscular than their ballet counter-
parts, while dancesport dancers are taller and heavier, less
muscular, with slightly greater adioposity compared to the clas-
sical ballet dancers. Ballet dancers had the lowest body fat per-
centage, weight, and BMI values. Dancesport dancers had
greater aerobic capacity than the ballet dancers. Based on this
study, we conclude that dancers in these three styles differ in
some aspects of anthropometric variables, somatotypes, and
aerobic capacity, but we cannot say is it because of the training
or selection or both. Med Probl Perform Art 2013; 28(4):207–211.
D ancers face the difficult task of combining the aes-
thetic and physical components of their perform-
ance. They have been referred as “performing”23 and or
“aesthetic”35 athletes who remain subject to the same
unyielding physical laws as in other athletes.2 Dance train-
ing is a long process of physical, intellectual, and psycho-
logical preparation through physical exercise, often begin-
ning in childhood and continuing until retirement.1
From the 1Faculty of Exercise and Sport Sciences, University of Tartu,
Tartu, Estonia, and 2Research Centre for Sport Exercise and Perform-
ance, University of Wolverhampton, Walsall, UK; and 3National Insti-
tute of Dance Medicine and Science, UK.
Supported by the Estonian Ministry of Education and Science target
financed grant 0489; by the Doctoral School of Behavioral, Social and
Health Sciences created under the auspices of European Social Fund; and
by Estonian Science Foundation (ESF) DoRa 6 and DoRa 8 program.
Address correspondence to: Dr. Helena Liiv, Faculty of Exercise and
Sport Sciences, University of Tartu, Jakobi 5, Tartu 51014, Estonia. Tel
+372 5291059, +372 737 5372, fax +372 737 5373. liivhelena@gmail.com.
© 2013 Science & Medicine. www.sciandmed.com/mppa.
For optimal performance, dancers must be experts in
the aesthetic and technical sides of their art, psychologi-
cally prepared to handle the stress of critical situations,
and free from injury. They must also be physically fit.24 It
has been suggested that functional adaptation due to dif-
ferent training regimens may be responsible for the deter-
mination of some anthropometric15 and physiological32
changes. The number of hours per day and the days per
week that a specific physical activity is performed may
result in systematic changes in body composition.4 Hamil-
ton,19 on the other hand, has said that “it is unclear
whether ballet selects the perfect body, creates it, or both.”
To our best of knowledge, there is no study done that
has compared anthropometric variables, somatotypes, and
aerobic capacity between classical ballet dancers, contem-
porary dancers, and dancesport athletes. Dancesport is
defined as partner dancing between a man and woman
combining as a couple. It has developed from ballroom
dances performed by couples. Currently recognized disci-
plines in international style dancesport are standard
dances, Latin American dances, and “ten dance” disci-
plines. Contemporary dance emerged at the beginning of
the 20th century as a breakaway from the rigid constraints
of classical ballet, which itself started as a performance art
in the French courts in the 16th and 17th century.2
A previous study has found no difference in VO2max
between ballet, contemporary, jazz, and character dance
students.13 Based on previous research2,25 that reported
VO2max values, we can assume that dancesport athletes
have higher aerobic capacity than ballet and contemporary
dancers. However, successful ballet dancers were taller and
thinner than modern dancers, although these differences
were not significant.16 The majority of previous studies
have focused on dancers in one specific dance style, such as
ballet, contemporary, or dancesport. It has been suggested
that ballet, contemporary, and dancesport dancers per-
formance would benefit from a good aerobic capacity,1,22,25
and that performance of ballet and contemporary dancers
benefits from physiological capabilities such as muscular
strength and power.7,22 Little published data exist on
dancers’ somatotypes,16 but anthropometrical parameters
such as height and weight are well studied.2,6,12,25,28 It has
been found that body composition is influencing dance
performance.2 Many authors have been concerned about
the low body fat percentage of female ballet dancers,20,31 as
it can increase the risk of injury and delay healing.30
Just as the term sport covers a wide variety of different
disciplines, dance is an umbrella term that includes diverse
December 2013 207
genres. Therefore, data obtained from one dance style may
not be applicable to other genres. Different dance styles
have different training and performance regimes. Audi-
tions into dance schools and companies often involve
selecting dancers with specific anthropometric parameters.
Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to com-
pare anthropometric variables, such as body weight,
height, percent body fat, somatotype, and aerobic capacity,
among three different groups of dancers: classical ballet,
contemporary dance, and dancesport. It was hypothesed
that dancesport athletes would have higher aerobic capac-
ity indicators compared to the other two dance genres. In
addition, ballet dancers are more mesomorphic, with
lower body fat percentage compared to the dancesport and
contemporary dancers.
METHODS
Participants
Two hundred eighty-six dancers from the dance genres
took part in the study: 89 ballet dancers (male 33, female
56), 137 contemporary dancers (M 28, F 109), and 60
dancesport dancers (M 30, F 30). Ballet and contemporary
dancers were professionals. All dancesport athletes were
dancing couples who are competing at the international
level. Anthropometric measurements (height, weight, and
BMI) were taken on all the participants. Aerobic capacity
(VO2max) was measured in 40 ballet dancers (M 17, F 23), 19
contemporary dancers (M 7, F 12), and 60 dancesport
dancers (M 30, F 30). Body fat percentage and somatotype
characteristics were determined on 49 ballet dancers (M
16, F 33), 118 contemporary dancers (M 21, F 97) and 60
dancesport dancers (M 30, F 30).
Participants originated from Eastern Europe and the
UK. Dancesport athletes were among the top 6% of the ath-
letes listed in the world rankings.14 The couples had been
dancing together for the 3.9±2.8 yrs. Average training expe-
rience for dancesport athletes was 14.9±5.1 yrs, and they
currently trained 11.9±6.2 hrs/wk. Dancesport participants
reported that they practiced manly dancesport-specific
training but also made physical preparation for the season
(jogging, stretching, etc). Ballet and contemporary dance
participants trained 38 hrs/wk, 6 days a week. There was
no organized cross training in all three dance styles.
All participants were healthy and free of injury. All partic-
ipants signed an informed consent prior to testing. This study
was approved by the Medical Ethics Committees of the Uni-
versity of Tartu and the University of Wolverhampton.
Anthropometry, Body Mass Index, Percent Body
Fat, and Somatotypes
Body height (Martin metal anthropometer, GPM SilberHeg-
ner, Zürich, Switz.) and body mass (A&D Instruments,
Abingdon, UK) of the participants were measured to the
nearest 0.1 cm and 0.05 kg, respectively. The body mass
index (BMI) was calculated as weight/height2. Body compo-
208 Medical Problems of Performing Artists
sition was measured using dual-energy x-ray absorptiome-
try. Whole body scans were performed using a Lunar DPX-
IQ densitometer (Lunar Corp., Madison, WI) and analyzed
for body fat percentage.
All anthopometrical parameters for determination of
somatotypes were measured according to the protocol rec-
ommended by International Society for the Advancement
of Kinanthropometry (ISAK) by a person certified by
ISAK.27 Nine skinfolds, 13 girths, 8 lengths, and 11
breadth/lengths were measured on the right side of the
body using a Holtain skinfold caliper (Holtain, Crym-
mych, Grosswell, UK. Three series of anthropometric
measurements were taken for each site and the mean was
recorded. Three somatotypes components—endomorphy,
mesomorphy and ectomorphy—were calculated according
to the anthropometric somatotyping method.9
Incremental Treadmill Test
Maximal oxygen consumption was measured during an
incremental treadmill test until volitional exhaustion.
Heart rate (HR) was recorded at every 5 sec during the test
using Sporttester Polar 725X (Polar Electro, Oy Kempele,
Finland). The standardized 5-min warm up at 7 km/hr for
males and 5 km/hr for females was used before incremen-
tal test. The test started at 8 km/hr for males and 6 km/hr
for females and speed was increased by 1 km/hr after
every 2 min until exhaustion. Treadmill incline was 0%
throughout the incremental test. Breath-by-breath respira-
tory gas exchange variables were measured throughout the
test using a portable open-circuit spirometry system (Meta-
Max 3B, Cortex Biophysic GmbH, Leipzig, Germany. The
analyzer was calibrated before the test with gases of known
concentration according to the manufacturer’s guidelines.
All data were processed by using standard software (Meta-
Soft, Cortex Biophysic GmbH) and the system for heart
rate (HR) analysis.
Statistical Analysis
Data were assessed for normality, and a 2 × 3 factorial
analysis (gender × dance style) was used to test for differ-
ences; Scheffe and Tukey post-hoc tests were used for
between-style comparisons (SPSS 20.0 for Windows,
Chicago, IL) and Pearson product correlations to ascertain
relationships between specific variables. The level of sig-
nificance was set at p<0.05.
RESULTS
Anthropometrical characteristics of the subjects are pre-
sented in Table 1. There were significant differences
between dance styles in height (f2,280 = 9.677, p<0.001), body
mass (f2,280 = 11.912, p<0.001), and BMI (f2,280 = 18.822,
p<0.001) values. Post hoc tests indicated that male and
female dancesport dancers were taller compared to same
gender contemporary dance participants (p<0.05). Female
contemporary dance and dancesport dancers had higher
 TABLE 1. Mean Anthropometrical Characteristics and BMI of Dancers in Different Styles

Ballet Contemporary DanceSport

____________________________ ____________________________ ____________________________
Male Female Male Female Male Female
(n=33) (n=56) (n=28) (n=109) (n=30) (n=30)

Age (yrs) 22.39±4.6 21.07±4.48 24.68±4.83 22.00±3.24 22.83±6.56 21.99±6.36

Height (m) 1.78±0.07 1.64±0.04 1.76±0.06 1.64±0.06 1.80±0.06† 1.67±0.05†
Body mass (kg) 67.45±7.35 50.38±4.39 68.08±7.44 55.72±6.33* 71.87±6.13 55.72±4.60‡
BMI (kg/m2) 21.27±1.55 18.65±1.31 22.04±1.79 20.82±1.80* 22.00±1.33 19.90±1.23†‡
Data given as mean±SD. BMI, body mass index.
*p<0.01 comparing ballet and contemporary dancers of the same gender.
†p<0.05 comparing contemporary and dancesport dancers of the same gender.
‡p<0.01 comparing ballet and dancesport dancers of the same gender.

body mass and BMI values compared with female ballet
dancers (p<0.001). Female contemporary dancers had
higher BMI values than female dancesport dancers
(p<0.05). There was a significant difference in age (p<0.05),
height, body mass, and BMI (p<0.001) between genders.
There was a significant difference in VO2max values
between three dance styles (f2,112 = 33.724, p<0.001), and
post hoc tests indicated VO2max values of dancesport
dancers were significantly higher (p<0.01) (Table 2).
There were significant difference between dance styles
in body fat percentage (f2,112 = 5.524, p<0.05). Female con-
temporary and dancesport dancers had higher body fat
percentage than female ballet dancers (p<0.001). There was
no significant difference among male dancers in body fat
percentage.
There was significant difference in endomorphy (f2,112 =
8.773, p<0.001) and mesomorphy (f2,112 = 21.458, p<0.001)
characteristics between dance styles. Female dancesport
dancers had lower endomorphy values compared to
female ballet and contemporary dancers (p<0.001). Female
ballet dancers had lower mesomorphy values compared to
female contemporary (p<0.05) dancers. In contrast, female
ballet dancers had higher mesomorphy scores compared
to female dancesport participants. Male (p<0.05) and
female (p<0.001) contemporary dancers had higher meso-
morphy values than same-gender dancesport dancers.
There was a significant difference between genders in
body fat percentage, endomorphy, and mesomorphy
values (p<0.001). There were no significant differences in
ectomorphy scores.
DISCUSSION
The aim of the present study was to assess the homogenity
of professional dancers for anthropometric variables and
aerobic capacity. Within the exercise science literature,
there have been very few studies that have compared the
different dance genres to ascertain whether there are uni-
form characteristics such as body shape and aeriobic fit-
ness among the three dance genres classical ballet, contem-
porary dance, and dancesport. Within sport, it is well
established that different sports require participants to
have specific anthropometric and physical characteristics
to compete at an elite level.4,17 It has also been suggested

TABLE 2. Mean Percent Body Fat, Maximal O2 Uptake, and Somatotype of Dancers in Different Dance Styles
Ballet Contemporary DanceSport
____________________________ ____________________________ ____________________________
Male Female Male Female Male Female

Anthropometric (n=16) (n=33) (n=21) (n=97) (n=30) (n=30)

Body fat % 12.65±2.92 17.52±2.54 12.98±0.97 21.2±3.81* 13.06±4.33 21.92±3.74†
Endomorphy 2.34±0.91 3.59±0.84 2.63±0.67 3.79±1.07 2.38±0.63 2.72±0.67†‡
Mesomorphy 4.63±1.59 3.43±1.07 4.88±1.17 4.07±0.97 § 3.89±0.73¶ 2.73±0.81 ‡#
Ectomorphy 2.59±0.95 3.65±0.96 2.98±0.97 3.29±5.20 3.22±0.76 3.54±0.78
Incremental fitness test (n=17) (n=23) (n=7) (n=12) (n=30) (n=30)
VO2max (mL/min/kg) 49.61±3.93 43.69±5.13 56.88±4.94§ 47.51±6.44 59.95±5.19† 51.53±6.00#

Data given as mean±SD.

* p<0.01 comparing ballet and contemporary dancers of the same gender.
† p<0.01 comparing ballet and dancesport dancers of the same gender.
‡ p<0.01 comparing ballet and dancesport dancers of the same gender.
§ p<0.05 comparing ballet and contemporary dancers of the same gender.
¶ p<0.05 comparing contemporary and dancesport dancers of the same gender.
# p<0.05 comparing ballet and dancesport dancers of the same gender.

December 2013 209

 FIGURE 1. Mean somatotypes for male and female ballet (B), contemporary (C), and dancesport (D) dancers.
that functional adaptation due to different training regi-
mens may be responsible for the determination of some
anthropometric changes.15 Height, body weight, body fat
percentage, and VO2max values of classical ballet dancers,
contemporary dancers, and dancesport dancers were simi-
lar to those reported in previous studies.5,6,10,21,25
Female ballet dancers had lowest body fat percentage,
body mass, and BMI compared with female contemporary
dance and dancesport dancers, confirming the genre’s
requirements for female dancers to be light, low body fat
content, and low body weight in order to perform the tasks
related to classical ballet.29 Female ballet dancers lower
body fat percentage, body mass, and BMI compared with
female contemporary and dancesport dancers may relate
to different aesthetic values of ballet, contemporary, and
dancesport dancers. The observed higher height of dance-
sport athletes compared to contemporary dancers may be
related to the fact that dancesport does not have lifts
within its choreography, which require the female dancer
to be lifted above the partner’s head where her weight
could become an issue. The choreography, especially with
standard dances, requires large movements and shapes,
especially in the upper body, which is enhanced by having
a taller frame and longer limbs. Standard dance is one of
three dancesport disciplines where five standard dances
(waltz, tango, Viennese waltz, slow foxtrot, and quickstep)
are performed. All standard dances demand wide move-
ment and big shapes, and in dance hold, greater height
probably helps to achieve this.
There was significant difference in mesomorphic and
endomorphy scores between the three dance styles (Fig. 1).
Female danceport dancers are less mesomorphic and endo-
morphic than females of the other two dance styles, and
female contemporary dancers are more mesomorphic than
female ballet dancers. The reason for higher mesomorphy
scores for contemporary dancers may be because, unlike
most ballet dances, contemporary dance has less of a
gender divide within the choreographed movements34 and
the dancers often come from a multidisciplinary back-
ground (e.g., gymnastics).23
210 Medical Problems of Performing Artists
Previous research has reported the somatotypes for aes-
thetic sports like gymnastics and figure skating are as fol-
lows: figure skating, males 1.7–5.0–2.918 and females 3.4–
3.7–2.926; gymnastics, male 2.6–6.2–1.58 and females 2.6–
4.4–2.6.8 Compared to other aesthetic sports such as figure
skating and gymnastics, male dancers of all three genres
(ballet, contemporary and dancesport) were less mesomor-
phic than male gymnasts8 and figure skaters.18 Male con-
temporary dance and dancesport participants were more
ectomorphic compared to male figure skaters18 and gym-
nasts.8 Male ballet dancers were more ectomorphic com-
pared to male gymnasts.8
Female figure skaters26 and gymnasts11 were more
mesomorphic compared to female dancesport and ballet
participants. Female contemporary dancers, on the other
hand, were more mesomorphic than female figure
skaters26 and gymnasts.11 Female dancers of all three
genres were more ectomorphic compared to female figure
skaters26 and gymnasts.11
It has been suggested that dancers would benefit from
aerobic training1 and a high anaerobic threshold to limit
the effects of fatigue, such as a decrease in balance, poise,
and coordination.3,25,33 The dancesport participants
recorded the highest relative oxygen uptake, while classical
ballet dancers demonstrated lower maximal oxygen
uptake than contemporary dancers.2 These differences
could be due to the variation in the physical demands of
dancing in the different genres.13,34 Classical ballet and
modern dance are noncompetitive, and dancers do not
need to strive against others during performance. Dances-
port, in contrast, requires competing throughout the day
and to be recalled through a number of rounds before
reaching the final. This difference between the genres is
especially highlighted in the aerobic capcity of female
dancers, where the dancesport participants had signifi-
cantly higher VO2max than the other two genres. This
could be due to the training and competitive requirements
of dancesport and especially standard dances, which
require the female dancers to match their male partners
stride for stride.
 CONCLUSION 15. Del Balso C, Cafarelli E. Adaptations in the activation of
human skeletal muscle induced by short-term isometric resist-
ance training. J Appl Physiol 2007;103:402–411
Classical ballet, contemporary dance, and dancesport
16. Dolgener FA, Spasoff TC, St.John WE. Body build and body
dancers differ by somatotype. Female contemporary composition of high ability female dancers. Res Q Exerc Sport.
dancers are generally more muscular than their ballet 1980; 51:599–607.
counterparts, while dancesport dancers are taller and 17. Duncan MJ, Woodfield L, al-Nakeeb Y. Anthropometric and
heavier, less muscular, and with slightly greater adioposity physiological characteristics of junior elite volleyball players. Br
J Sports Med 2006; 40:649–651.
than the classical ballet and contemporary dancers. Ballet
18. Faulkner RA. Physique characteristics of Canadian figure
dancers had the lowest body fat percentage, weight, and skaters [thesis]. Vancouver, BC, Simon Fraser University, 1976.
BMI values. Dancesport dancers had greater aerobic 19. Hamilton L, Hamilton WG, Warren MP, et al. Factors contribut-
capacity than ballet dancers. Based on the results of this ing to the attrition rate in elite ballet students. J Dance Med Sci
study, we can conclude that classical ballet dancers, con- 1997; 4:131–138.
20. Hamilton LH, Brooks-Gunn J, Warren MP, Hamilton WG. The
temporary dancers, and dancesport professionals differ in
role of selectivity in the pathogenesis of eating problems in ballet
some aspects of anthropometric variables, somatotype, dancers. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1988; 20:560–565.
and aerobic capacity, but we cannot say if it is because of 21. Harley YXR, Gibson ASC, Harley EH, et al. Quadriceps
the training, selection, or both. strength and jumping efficiency in dancers. J Dance Med Sci
2002; 6:87–94.
22. Koutedakis Y, Hukam H, Metsios G, et al. The effects of three
REFERENCES
months of aerobic and strength training on selected perform-
ance and fitness-related parameters in modern dance students. J
1. Allen N, Wyon M. Dance medicine: artist or athlete? SportEX
Strength Cond Res 2007; 21:808–812.
Med 2008; 35:6–9.
23. Koutedakis Y, Jamurtas A. The dancer as a performing athlete:
2. Angioi M, Metsios G, Koutedakis Y, Wyon MA. Fitness in con-
physiological considerations. Sports Med 2004; 34:651–661.
temporary dance: a systematic review. Int J Sports Med 2009;
24. Koutedakis Y, Sharp NCC. Thigh-muscles strength training,
30:475–484.
dance exercise, dynamometry, and anthropometry in profes-
3. Baldari C, Guidetti L. VO2max, ventilatory and anaerobic thresh-
sional ballerinas. J Strength Cond Res 2004; 18:714–718.
olds in rhythmic gymnasts and young female dancers. J Sports
25. Liiv H, Jürimäe T, Mäestu J, Purge P, Hannus A, Jürimäe J. Phys-
Med Phys Fit 2001; 41:177–182.
iological characteristics of elite dancers of different dance styles.
4. Bandyopadhyay A. Anthropometry and body composition in
Eur J Sport Sci 2012; (8):1–8. doi: 10.1080/.17461391.2012.
soccer and volleyball players in West Bengal, India. J Physiol
711861.
Anthropol 2007; 24:501–505.
26. Monsma EV, Malina RM. Correlates of eating disorders risk
5. Berlet GC, Kiebzak GM, Dandar A, et al. Prospective analysis of
among female figure skates: a profile of adolescent competitors.
body composition and SF-36 profiles in professional dancers
J. Sports Psychol 2004; 5:447–460.
over a 7-month season: is there a correlation to injury? J Dance
27. Norton K, Olds T. Anthropometrica. Sydney: UNSW Press;
Med Sci 2002; 6:54–61.
1996.
6. Bria S, Bianco M, Galvani C, et al. Physiological characteristics
28. Silva AH, Bonorino KC. BMI and flexibility in ballerinas of
of elite sport-dancers. J Sports Med Phys Fit 2011; 51:194–203.
contemporary dance and classical ballet. Fit Perf J 2008; 7:48–51.
7. Brown AC, Wells TJ, Shade ML, et al. Effects of polymetric
29. Tsunawake N, Tahara Y, Moji K, et al. Body composition and
training versus traditional weight training on strength, power,
physical fitness of female volleyball and basketball players of the
and aesthetic jumping ability in female collegiate dancers. J
Japan inter-high school championship teams. J Physiol Anthro-
Dance Med Sci 2007; 11:38–44.
pol Appl Hum Sci 2003; 22:195–201.
8. Carter JE. The somatotypes of athletes—a review. Hum Biol Int
30. Twitchett E, Angioi M, Metsios G, et al. Body composition and
Record Res 1970; 42:535.
ballet injuries: a preliminary study. Med Probl Perform Art 2008;
9. Carter JEL, Heath BH. Somatotyping-development and applica-
23:93–98.
tions. In: Lasker GW, Mascie-Taylor CGN, Roberts DF, eds.
31. Twitchett E, Brodrick A, Nevill AM, et al. Does physical fitness
Cambridge Studies in Biological Anthropology. Cambridge:
affect injury occurrence and time loss due to injury in elite voca-
Cambridge University Press; 1990: p503.
tional ballet students? J Dance Med Sci 2010; 14:26–31.
10. Chmelar RD, Schultz BB, Ruhling RO. A physiologic profile
32. William J, Kraemer WJ, Ratamess N, et al. Influence of resist-
comparing levels and styles of female dancers. Phys Sportsmed
ance training volume and periodization on physiological and
1988; 16:87–96.
performance adaptations in collegiate women tennis players.
11. Claessens, AL, Lefevre J, Beunen G, Malina, RM. The contribu-
Am J Sports Med 2000; 5:626–633.
tion of anthropometric characteristics to performance scores in
33. Wyon M, Koutedakis Y. Muscle fatigue: considerations for
elite female gymnasts. J Sports Med Phys Fit 1999; 39: 355–60.
dance. J Dance Med Sci 2013; 17:63–69.
12. Coutts RA, Gilleard WL, Hennessy M, et al. Development and
34. Wyon MA, Twitchett E, Angioi M, et al. Time motion and video
assessment of an incremental fatigue protocol for contemporary
analysis of classical ballet and contemporary dance perform-
dance. Med Probl Perform Art 2006; 21:65-70.
ance. Int J Sports Med 2011; 32:851–855.
13. Dahlstrom PT, Inasio E, Kaijser L. Physical fitness effort in
35. Wyon MA. Testing an aesthetic athlete: contemporary dance
dancers: a comparison of four major dance styles. Impulse 1996;
and classic ballet dancers. In: Winter E, Jones AM, Davison
4:193–209.
RCR, eds. Sport and Exercise Physiology Testing Guidelines.
14. DancesportInfo Rating System. DancesportInfo [webpage].
London: Routledge; 2007: pp242–262.
Available from http://dancesportinfo.net/Desc_Rating.aspx;
accessed Sep 1, 2011.

December 2013 211

View publication stats