ACCURACY OF A MODIFIED LACTATE MINIMUM TEST
AND REVERSE LACTATE THRESHOLD TEST TO
DETERMINE MAXIMAL LACTATE STEADY STATE
PATRICK WAHL,1,2,3 CHRISTIAN MANUNZIO,1 FLORIAN VOGT,1 SARAH STRÜTT,1 PRISCA VOLMARY,1
WILHELM BLOCH,2,3 AND JOACHIM MESTER1,3
1
Institute of Training Science and Sport Informatics, German Sport University Cologne, Cologne, Germany; 2Department
of Molecular and Cellular Sport Medicine, Institute of Cardiovascular Research and Sport Medicine, German Sport
University Cologne, Cologne, Germany; and 3The German Research Centre for Elite Sport Cologne, German Sport
University Cologne, Cologne, Germany
ABSTRACT
Wahl, P, Manunzio, C, Vogt, F, Strütt, S, Volmary, P, Bloch, W,
and Mester, J. Accuracy of a modified lactate minimum test
and reverse lactate threshold test to determine maximal
lactate steady state. J Strength Cond Res 31(12): 3489–
3496, 2017—This study evaluated the accuracy of a modified
lactate minimum test (mLMT), a modified reverse lactate
threshold test (mRLT), compared with 2 established thresh-
old concepts (onset of blood lactate accumulation [OBLA]
and modified maximal deviation method [mDmax]) to deter-
mine power output at maximal lactate steady state (MLSS) in
cycling. Nineteen subjects performed an mLMT, mRLT,
graded exercise test (100 W start, +20 W every 3 minutes)
and 3 or more constant-load tests of 30 minutes to determine
power output at MLSS. The mLMT and mRLT both consisted
of an initial lactate priming segment, followed by a short
recovery phase. Afterward, the initial load of the subsequent
incremental or reverse segment was calculated individually
and was increased or decreased by 10 W every 90 seconds,
respectively. The mean difference to MLSS was +2 6 7 W
(mLMT), +5 6 10 W (mRLT), +9 6 21 W (OBLA), and +6 6
14 W (mDmax). The correlation between power output at
MLSS and mLMT was highest (r = 0.99), followed by mRLT
(r = 0.98), mDmax (r = 0.95), and OBLA (r = 0.90). Because
of the higher accuracy of the mLMT and the mRLT to deter-
mine MLSS compared with OBLA and mDmax, we suggest
both tests as valid and meaningful concepts to estimate
power output at MLSS in one single test in moderately
trained to well-trained athletes. Additionally, our modified
tests provide anaerobic data and do not require detailed
Address correspondence to Dr. Patrick Wahl, Wahl@dshs-koeln.de.
31(12)/3489–3496
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Ó 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
knowledge of the subjects’ training status compared with
previous LMT or RLT protocols.
KEY WORDS cycling, endurance performance, blood lactate
_ O2max
concentration, V
INTRODUCTION
T
he anaerobic threshold or the maximal lactate
steady state (MLSS; the highest constant workload
that still leads to an equilibrium between lactate
production and lactate elimination) is generally
regarded as an important indicator of aerobic endurance (5).
However, MLSS determination is time consuming and is
usually replaced by single-session tests. Certainly, these
single-session tests are differently handicapped by impaired
validity, accuracy, resolution, or reliability (2,14). Most exist-
ing single-session tests use either fixed lactate concentrations
(15,21) or transition/inflection points (6,9) as determination
criteria for MLSS. However, these criteria are either arbitrary
or empirically derived (28) and only reveal a graphical analysis
of the lactate curves produced by graded exercise tests. Addi-
tionally, the determination of the maximal oxygen consump-
_ O2max) during these graded exercise tests revealed
tion (V
lower results compared with ramp tests (27).
The lactate minimum test (LMT) (first introduced by
Tegtbur et al. (29)) and the reverse lactate threshold test
(RLT) (first introduced by Dotan (11)) are the only single-
session tests that are based on the physiologically founded
lactate appearance-disappearance equilibrium concept that
forms the basis for the MLSS test, as well. The LMT starts
with a short, high-lactemic exercise bout with the aim of
increasing lactate levels well above the MLSS and which
can also be used to measure V_ O2max. Subsequently, a typical
incremental protocol, starting well below the MLSS is per-
formed. Consequently, lactate concentration initially de-
creases before rising again with increasing exercise intensity,
resulting in a U-shaped curve. However, several problems
arise when using the “standard” LMT protocol of previous
VOLUME 31 | NUMBER 12 | DECEMBER 2017 | 3489
 Modified Test for MLSS Determination
studies (19,22). First, as already stated by Dotan (11), lactate
equilibrium can exist anywhere between LT1 and the MLSS
(transition or threshold zone) and is not necessarily the high-
est one attainable. Therefore, it seems to be important to avoid
a drop in lactate levels in this transition zone to avoid the
previously shown underestimation of the MLSS by the
LMT (8,20,22). Second, large increases in the load in a short
period of previous LMT protocols (e.g., 25 W every 90 sec-
onds (22)) may further hinder a very precise determination of
the power or speed at the MLSS by the LMT. However,
smaller increases in the load/speed with the same time per
step increase the risk to decrease lactate levels in the transition
zone, especially with highly trained athletes revealing high
lactate clearance rates (12,24). Therefore, it seems to be nec-
essary to choose an individual initial load and smaller increases
in the load for the second incremental protocol to obtain more
precise estimations of the MLSS by the LMT. Although
Knöepfli et al. (22) showed that the LMT generally starting
at 100 W is valid to estimate MLSS and that the mean differ-
ence between lactate minimum and MLSS is only 29 W, the
limits of agreement (241 to +21 W [2 SD]) are rather large.
To avoid the previously mentioned problem, that the
lactate minimum is not necessarily the highest equilibrium
attainable, Dotan (11) suggested, that no such ambiguity exists
when the load is decreased from intensities higher than the
MLSS. Therefore, after a so-called “lactate priming segment”
of which peak intensity was suggested to be ;5–20% higher
than the actual MLSS, a “reverse segment” follows, in
which load is decreased by 3–8% of estimated MLSS every
4 minutes. However, even for this RLT protocol, some limi-
tations might be present. First, the suggested peak intensity of
the “priming load” does not allow the determination of
V_ O2max. Second, the estimation of the initial load of the
“reverse segment” requires previous information of an athlete.
Additionally, overestimated initial intensities might lead to
premature exhaustion.
According to the mentioned limitations of both protocols
(LMT and RVT), the aim of this study was to modify both
protocols to solve these limitations and to further investigate
the accuracy of the modified tests to determine the MLSS.
The aim of designing the modified tests (modified
lactate minimum test [mLMT] and mRLT) was to determine
both major variables of endurance performance (MLSS and
V_ O2max) in a single test. Additionally, the accuracy of the
mLMT and mRLT to determine MLSS and V_ O2max will be
compared with a graded exercise test and 2 established
threshold concepts—onset of blood lactate accumulation
(OBLA; 4 mmol$L21) and modified maximal deviation
method (mDmax) (6)).
METHODS
Experimental Approach to the Problem
All subjects performed mLMT, mRLT, and graded exercise
test in a randomized counterbalanced order on a cycle
ergometer to determine lactate minimum, reverse lactate
the TM
3490 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
threshold, and OBLA/mDmax. Upon completing these 3
tests, constant-load tests were performed to determine
MLSS, which was then compared with power output at
lactate minimum, reverse lactate threshold, and OBLA/
mDmax. All tests were separated by at least 48 hours.
Subjects
Nineteen healthy, nonsmoking triathletes/cyclists (mean 6
SD, age: 28.5 6 8.3 (range: 18–49) years, weight: 71.2 6 9.3
kg, height: 176.3 6 5.7 cm; 15 male, 4 female) participated in
this study. Inclusion criteria were cardiovascular health and
regular cycling exercise. However, we included subjects with
different levels of fitness to investigate the accuracy of the
different tests. The study protocol was approved by the insti-
tutional review board, and the study was performed in accor-
dance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Subjects were
informed about the benefits and risks of the investigation
before signing the institutionally approved informed consent
document to participate in the study.
Procedures
To determine individual initial loads for the mLMT and the
mRLT, power output at MLSS was precalculated (calculated
MLSS) according to the method described by Hauser et al.
(13), which was shown to be reliable and valid to determine
MLSS (1), using the maximal lactate production rate
(VLamax) and the V_ O2max. To determine VLamax, athletes
performed a 15-second sprint test on an SRM ergometer
adjusted to an isokinetic mode set to a cadence of 120
rpm just in advance to the mLMT or the mRLT. Subjects
were instructed to perform the tests in a seated position on
the ergometer. Blood for lactate analysis was taken
every minute until the 10th minute to determine maximum
postexercise lactate concentration. After an additional
5-minute break, the initial ramp test of the mLMT or the
mRLT followed to determine V_ O2max. The MLSS was then
calculated during the short recovery period.
Modified Lactate Minimum Test
The modified lactate minimum test (mLMT) was adapted
from the protocol of Knöpfli-Lenzin (22) and consisted of 2
incremental parts: a first ramp test with the aim to determine
V_ O2max (Cortex Biophysik GmbH, Leipzig, Germany) and to
increase lactate levels, and a subsequent incremental test to
determine lactate minimum. The first ramp test started at 100
W with an increase of 20 W every minute until volitional
exhaustion was reached. The V_ O2max corresponded to the
highest value measured (average of 30 seconds) during the
ramp test. Afterward, a resting phase of 7 minutes followed.
The subsequent incremental test started ;40 W below the
calculated maximal lactate steady state (cMLSS) and work-
load was increased by 10 W every 90 seconds. Blood for
lactate analysis was taken from the earlobe (EBIOplus; EKF
Diagnostic Sales, Magdeburg, Germany) directly after the
ramp test, after the 7-minute resting phase and after each step
of the incremental part. Power output at lactate minimum was
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

TABLE 1. V_ O2max and peak power output (PPO) of the ramp test and the graded exercise test.

Ramp test Graded exercise test

PPO (W) V_ O2max (ml$min21$kg21) PPO (W) V_ O2max (ml$min21$kg21)

Mean 6 SD 328 6 56* 56.1 6 7.5* 275 6 43 53.5 6 7.0

Minimum–Maximum 220–400 37.9–69.3 180–320 35.5–63.8

*Significantly different compared with the graded exercise test (p # 0.05).

calculated during the second incremental test using the first
derivative of a third-order polynomial function placed in the
blood lactate vs. workload plot.
Modified Reverse Lactate Threshold Test
The mRLT consisted of 2 incremental parts: a first ramp test
with the aim to determine V_ O2max and to increase lactate
levels and a subsequent reverse segment to determine
reverse lactate threshold.
The ramp test was the same one of the mLMT. Upon
completing, a resting phase of 3 minutes followed. The
subsequent reverse segment started ;30 W above the
cMLSS and workload was decreased 10 W every 90 sec-
onds. Blood for lactate analysis was taken directly after the
ramp test, after the 3-minute resting phase and after each
step of the reverse segment. Power output at reverse lactate
threshold was determined as the first marked drop during
the reverse segment.
Graded Exercise Test (Onset of Blood Lactate Accumulation
and Modified Maximal Deviation Method)
The graded exercise test started at 100 W and increased 20
W every 3 minutes until volitional exhaustion was reached.
Blood for lactate analysis was taken after each step of the
graded exercise test. The OBLA was set at a value of 4
mmol$L21 and was used to determine power at MLSS (15).
mDmax was identified as the point on the third-order poly-
nomial curve that yielded the maximal perpendicular dis-
tance to the straight line formed by the point of the first
rise in lactate concentration ($0.4 mmol$L21) and the final
lactate point (6). The third-order polynomial curve was only
fitted from the first rise to the final lactate point.
Maximal Lactate Steady State Tests
The MLSS was determined by the means of several
constant-load tests. The MLSS was reached when blood
lactate was constant for the last 20 minutes (increase
#1 mmol$L21) during a 30-minute constant-load test and rose
.1 mmol$L21 at a workload 10 W higher. Blood samples
were taken under resting conditions after warm-up, and then
every 5 minutes during the 30-minute constant-load test.
Before each MLSS test, subjects warmed up for 10 minutes.
As the MLSS was determined in steps of 10 W, calculated
lactate minimum, reverse lactate threshold, OBLA, mDmax,
and cMLSS were rounded to 10 W. All tests were performed
on an SRM cycle ergometer (Schoberer Rad Meßtechnik
SRM GmbH, Jülich, Germany).

TABLE 2. Descriptive values of the modified lactate minimum (mLMT) and the modified reverse lactate threshold test
(mRLT).*

Initial load (% PPO [La] after RT [La] after 70 [La] at LM No. of steps till
mLMT RT) (mmol$L21) (mmol$L21) (mmol$L21) LM (n)

Mean 6 SD 55 6 5 8.8 6 1.9 10.0 6 2.2 6.3 6 2.3 5.7 6 1.0

Minimum- 46–65 6.0–12.4 7.8–17.2 3.5–14.3 4.0–8.0
Maximum

Initial load (% [La] after RT [La] after 30 [La] at RLT No. of steps till
mRLT PPO RT) (mmol$L21) (mmol$L21) (mmol$L21) RLT (n)

Mean 6 SD 78 6 3 7.9 6 2.0 9.9 6 2.0 10.2 6 2.4 3.7 6 1.0

Minimum– 71–82 5.0–11.8 6.5–13.9 6.8–15.3 2.0–6.0
Maximum

*PPO = peak power output; RT = ramp test; [La] = lactate concentration; LM = lactate minimum; RLT = reverse lactate threshold.

VOLUME 31 | NUMBER 12 | DECEMBER 2017 | 3491

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Modified Test for MLSS Determination

TABLE 3. Mean power output at maximal lactate steady state (MLSS), modified lactate minimum test (mLM), modified
reverse lactate threshold test (mRLT), onset of blood lactate accumulation (OBLA), modified maximal deviation
method (mDmax), and calculated maximal lactate steady state (cMLSS), mean difference to MLSS, correlation
coefficient between MLSS and the respective test, regression lines between MLSS and the respective test, and
effect sizes (ES) compared with MLSS.*

Mean difference to Correlation

Power output (W) MLSS (W) coefficient (r) Regression line ES

MLSS 224 6 44
mLMT 226 6 43 +2 6 7 0.99 y = 0.97x + 8.41 0.05
mRLT 229 6 44 +5 6 10 0.98 y = 0.98x + 9.95 0.11
OBLA 233 6 49 +9 6 21 0.90 y = 1.01x + 7.10 0.19
mDmax 230 6 43 +6 6 14 0.95 y = 0.93x + 21.78 0.14
cMLSS 225 6 48 +1 6 14 0.96 y = 1.05x 2 10.91 0.02

*Values are shown as mean 6 SD.

Statistical Analyses display agreement of power output at lactate minimum,

Statistical analyses of the data were performed using
a statistics software package (Statistica for Windows, 7.0;
StatSoft, Tulsa, OK, USA). Descriptive statistics of the data
are presented as mean 6 SD. To assess the differences
between MLSS, mLMT, mRLT, OBLA, and mDmax,
ANOVA repeated-measures with the Bonferroni post hoc test
was used. Statistical differences were considered significant
for p # 0.05. Bland-Altman plots were constructed to
reverse lactate threshold, OBLA, mDmax, and cMLSS with
power output at MLSS. Mean and limits of agreement (62
SD) are indicated. The effect size (ES; Cohen’s d) obtained
in each statistical analysis is interpreted as proposed by
Hopkins (17) (www.sportsci.org/resource/stats): with ES
,0.2 considered as trivial; between 0.2 and 0.5, small;
between 0.6 and 1.1, moderate; between 1.2 and 1.9, large;
and .2.0, very large.

TABLE 4. Power output at maximal lactate steady state (MLSS), modified lactate minimum test (mLM), modified
reverse lactate threshold test (mRLT), onset of blood lactate accumulation (OBLA), modified maximal deviation
method (mDmax), and calculated maximal lactate steady state (cMLSS) for each individual subject.

Subjects MLSS (W) mLMT (W) mRLT (W) OBLA (W) mDmax (W) cMLSS (W)

1 240 240 230 260 230 250

2 250 250 260 270 260 240
3 250 250 250 250 240 240
4 180 190 210 220 220 190
5 220 230 230 230 240 230
6 180 190 180 210 200 180
7 170 170 170 180 170 170
8 170 170 170 120 160 160
9 160 160 160 170 160 150
10 270 260 260 250 250 260
11 240 250 240 240 250 250
12 130 130 140 140 140 120
13 250 250 260 260 250 260
14 250 260 260 270 270 270
15 260 270 270 300 270 270
16 260 260 260 250 260 280
17 260 250 260 260 260 230
18 260 270 280 280 260 280
19 260 250 270 270 280 240

the TM

3492 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

RESULTS Calculated VLamax revealed values of 0.68 6 0.12

V_ O2max and peak power output (PPO) in the ramp test were
significantly higher compared with the graded exercise test
(p = 0.00002 and p , 0.00001) (Table 1). The ramp test and
the graded exercise test resulted in a time to exhaustion of
12.4 6 2.8 minutes and 29.3 6 6.5 minutes, respectively.
During the 15-s sprint test subjects reached a PPO of
1,001 6 224 [W] (range: 601–1,346 [W]) and a mean power
output (MPO) of 792 6 171 [W] (range: 488–1,151 [W]).
[mmol$L21$s21] (range: 0.48–0.99 [mmol$L21$s21]).
Descriptive values of the mLMT and mRLT are presented
in Table 2. Mean power output at MLSS was 68.0 6 4.3%
(range: 59–74%) of PPO of the ramp test. Lactate concen-
tration at MLSS showed a mean value of 4.3 6 1.1
[mmol$L21] (range: 2.3–6.8 [mmol$L21]).
Overall ANOVA revealed no significant differences (p =
0.07) between power output at lactate minimum, reverse

Figure 1. Bland-Altman plots: difference of power output at maximal lactate steady state (MLSS) and the respective tests: (A) modified lactate minimum test
(mLMT), (B) modified reverse lactate threshold (mRLT), (C) modified maximal deviation method (mDmax), (D) onset of blood lactate accumulation (OBLA;
4 mmol$L21), and (E) calculated maximal lactate steady state (cMLSS). The solid line indicates the mean difference; dashed lines indicate the limits of agreement
(mean 6 2 SD).

VOLUME 31 | NUMBER 12 | DECEMBER 2017 | 3493

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Modified Test for MLSS Determination
lactate threshold, mDmax, OBLA, cMLSS, and MLSS
(Table 3). Power output at lactate minimum, reverse lactate
threshold, OBLA, mDmax, and cMLSS correlated signifi-
cantly with power output at MLSS and the regression lines
mainly run in parallel to the line of identity (Table 3). Indi-
vidual power output for each subject and each test is shown
in Table 4.
Bland-Altman plots showed good agreement of all tests
with MLSS (Figure 1). However, mLMT showed the
smallest limits of agreement (212 to +16 W) of all tests.
The largest discrepancy in between all mLMTs was 610 W.
In contrast, OBLA showed the largest limits of agreement
(233 to +51 W), with the largest deviations of 250 and
+40 W (Figure 1).
Mean heart rate at MLSS was 164 6 13 b$min21 (90 6
3% of maximum heart rate). Heart rate at lactate minimum
(168 6 11 b$min21; p , 0.001), reverse lactate threshold
(168 6 12 b$min21; p = 0.009), and OBLA (167 6 10
b$min21; p = 0.049) was significantly higher compared with
heart rate at MLSS. Heart rate at mDmax (165 6 13
b$min21; p = 0.46) showed no significant difference com-
pared with heart rate at MLSS.
DISCUSSION
The objective of this study was to test the accuracy of the
mLMT and mRLT to determine MLSS. The aim of the
modifications was to solve the previously reported underes-
timation of the MLSS by the LMT, to improve the
precision, and to be able to determine the V_ O2max within
an RLT protocol. The approach was to choose individual
initial loads for the second incremental part of the mLMT
and the reverse segment of the mRLT, respectively, and to
implement small increases/decreases in the load. The pre-
cision of these modified tests to determine MLSS was com-
pared with established threshold concepts (OBLA and
mDmax), determined during a graded exercise test. The
mLMT showed the highest accuracy in determining the
MLSS. Given the resolution with which MLSS is typically
determined (10–20 W) (28), the mean difference and the
limits of agreement (2 SD) (2 6 14 W) for the comparison
between lactate minimum and MLSS power indicate that
our mLMT provides an exceptional estimate of MLSS
power. For the mRLT (5 6 20 W), mDmax (6 6 28 W),
and cMLSS (1 6 28 W), the mean difference and the limits
of agreement were slightly higher. The worst result was
produced by OBLA (9 6 42 W).
The individual initial load seems to solve the previously
documented underestimation of the MLSS by the LMT
(8,20,22). Unlike the results of Knöpfli-Lenzin et al. (22), we
found no underestimation of the MLSS by the mLMT.
Although the mean difference (underestimation) in this study
was only 29 W, the limits of agreement were remarkably
larger (241 to +21 W) compared with the present results.
Indeed, we have to remark that the number of subjects tested
in this study was much larger (n = 63). For precise results of
the TM
3494 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
the LMT, it is essential that the initial lactate concentration
be sufficiently high and even more, to prevent a decrease in
lactate levels in the transition zone between LT1 and MLSS
during the incremental phase. This fact is supported by the
results of Ribeiro at al. (25), who showed that the
lactate minimum is lowered when active recovery is per-
formed during the resting phase. Compared with Smith
et al. (26), we had similar peak [La] after the ramp test and
similar [La] at lactate minimum. A decrease in lactate levels
in the transition zone might explain the previously shown
underestimation of MLSS by the LMT (22), especially for
highly trained athletes because of the low starting intensities
of the incremental phase. In contrast to the fixed starting
intensity (100 W) in the study of Knöpfli-Lenzin (22), Johnson
et al. (18) also chose a more individualized approach, by
standardizing the starting intensity for the incremental phase
to 40–45% of the maximal power achieved in the lactate
elevation phase. However, Johnson et al. (18) did not com-
pare their determined lactate minimum with the MLSS,
which limits the evaluation of this approach to determine
MLSS. This standardization might be appropriate for the
tested recreational subjects (V_ O2max: 46.1 ml$min21$kg21),
but not for highly trained athletes showing higher rates of
lactate elimination, and an MLSS closer to their PPO (high
fractional utilization of V_ O2max at MLSS) (4). The starting
intensity of 40–45% of maximal power might even be too
low to prevent the decrease of lactate levels in the transition
zone. In the present study, the initial load varied between
46–65% of PPO, depending on the cMLSS (and the lactate
levels after 7 minutes of recovery). Only in 2 cases of a low
cMLSS and conspicuously high initial lactate levels, we
chose 1–2 steps more than the intended 4 steps (40 W)
below the cMLSS.
Generally, the use of the cMLSS for a first estimation of the
MLSS is advantageous in comparison with protocols in which
knowledge of training status (3,20,29) or time-consuming
separate testing (10,23,26) is required. The 15-second sprint
test can easily be performed in advance of the mLMT or the
mRLT because it is not highly demanding. Additionally, the
15-second sprint test generates additional information about
the anaerobic capacity of an athlete like the PPO, MPO, and
VLamax (16).
Another factor that might have increased the accuracy of
the present mLMT might be the small increases in power
output of only 10 W every 90 seconds, compared with 25 W
every 90 seconds in the study of Knöpfli-Lenzin et al. (22).
Johnson et al. (18) chose individual power increments
of +5% of PPO, which would lead to similar increases
of ;10 W for moderately trained subjects, but which would
lead to even larger increases of ;20 W or more for highly
trained athletes.
In a pilot study with 4 athletes, Dotan (11) found excep-
tional agreement at 0.5% discrepancy or better between the
reverse lactate threshold and the MLSS. Despite the modifi-
cations of the original protocol, the mRLT showed good

agreement with the MLSS (3 6 5%) too. Regardless of these
modifications, this is the first study that investigated this very
elegant approach in a larger cohort of subjects. The most
difficult facts about the mRLT are the exhaustion after the
ramp test and the required recovery period afterward, which
is not part of the original protocol. In pretests, we observed
that after a 7-minute recovery period, lactate levels directly
started to decrease in most cases, despite a load well above the
MLSS. The problem seems to be that, during a long recovery
period, a new equilibrium between muscle and blood lactate
levels is established. After such a long recovery period, the
blood-to-muscle lactate gradient seems to be that high,
that the muscle takes up lactate (as the direction of lactate
transport by monocarboxylate transporters is driven by the
gradient (7)), despite the high load well above MLSS. There-
fore, we decided to keep the break as short as possible and
chose 3 minutes after the ramp test. However, such a short
break after an exhausting exercise is associated with a high
risk of overstraining the athlete in the reverse segment. Hence,
the mRLT was more difficult to execute, more demanding for
the athletes and more challenging to interpret than the
mLMT. Furthermore, Dotan (11) chose 4-minute stages in
the reverse segment, which is generally considered to allow
for a better muscle-blood lactate equilibration. However, our
increases in the load and the stage duration are similar to
those of Dotan (11). For instance, if an athlete reveals a power
output of 300 W at MLSS, a 6% decrease in the load per step
(as suggested by Dotan (11)) would result in a decrease of
18 W every 4 minutes. Summing up 2 steps of our mRLT or
mLMT, the load is decreased/increased similarly by 20 W
every 3 minutes. Actually, the increases/decreases in the load
of the mLMT/mRLT of 10 W every 90 seconds are similar to
our graded exercise test of 20 W every 180 seconds. Addition-
ally, it is unlikely that longer step durations within the mRLT
would be tolerated by the athletes, as those would presumably
result in a premature exhaustion.
After the graded exercise test, we used 2 different
threshold concepts (OBLA, mDmax) to determine MLSS
from the lactate curve. The mean difference and the limits of
agreement of the mDmax (6 W 6 28) were slightly larger
compared with the mRLT (5 W 6 20). The OBLA (9 W 6
42) showed the worst results of all tests. In addition to esti-
mating MLSS more precisely, the mLMT and mRLT also
revealed significantly higher V_ O2max values, compared with
the graded exercise test.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
In general, all test provided good agreement (small mean
difference) with the MLSS. However, when looking at the
limits of agreement, we found large differences in between
the tests, with the mLMT showing the best results. The
mLMT and its MLSS verification exhibited exceptional
agreement of 1.1 6 3.0% discrepancy. The agreement of
the other tests was 2.5 6 4.7% for mRLT, 4.1 6 10.7% for
OBLA, 2.4 6 7.1% for mDmax, and 0.1 6 6.1% for
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com
cMLSS. Because of this high precision, we recommend
performing the mLMT with competitive athletes, whereas
for recreational athletes a normal graded exercise test with
mDmax might be sufficient to estimate the MLSS. How-
ever, one also has to keep in mind that V_ O2max values
during the graded exercise test are lower compared with
the ramp test. Another advantage of the mLMT, com-
pared with previous LMT might be that it does not
require detailed knowledge of subjects’ training status
and that additional anaerobic data can be determined
within one testing session.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
REFERENCES
1. Adam, J, Öhmichen, M, Öhmichen, E, Rother, J, Müller, UM,
Hauser, T, and Schulz, H. Reliability of the calculated maximal
lactate steady state in amateur cyclists. Biol Sport 32: 97–102,
2015.
2. Arratibel-Imaz, I, Calleja-González, J, Emparanza, JI, Terrados, N,
Mjaanes, JM, and Ostojic, SM. Lack of concordance amongst
measurements of individual anaerobic threshold and maximal
lactate steady state on a cycle ergometer. Phys Sportsmed 44: 34–
45, 2016.
3. Bacon, L and Kern, M. Evaluating a test protocol for predicting
maximum lactate steady state. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 39: 300–
308, 1999.
4. Bassett, DR Jr and Howley, ET. Limiting factors for maximum
oxygen uptake and determinants of endurance performance. Med.Sci
Sports Exerc 32: 70–84, 2000.
5. Billat, VL, Sirvent, P, Py, G, Koralsztein, JP, and Mercier, J. The
concept of maximal lactate steady state: A bridge between
biochemistry, physiology and sport science. Sports Med 33: 407–
426, 2003.
6. Bishop, D, Jenkins, DG, and Mackinnon, LT. The relationship
between plasma lactate parameters, Wpeak and 1-h cycling
performance in women. Med Sci Sports Exerc 30: 1270–1275, 1998.
7. Brooks, GA. Intra- and extra-cellular lactate shuttles. Med Sci Sports
Exerc 32: 790–799, 2000.
8. Carter, H, Jones, AM, and Doust, JH. Changes in blood lactate and
pyruvate concentrations and the lactate-to-pyruvate ratio during the
lactate minimum speed test. J Sports Sci 18: 213–225, 2000.
9. Cheng, B, Kuipers, H, Snyder, AC, Keizer, HA, Jeukendrup, A, and
Hesselink, M. A new approach for the determination of ventilatory
and lactate thresholds. Int J Sports Med 13: 518–522, 1992.
10. Denadai, BS and Higino, WP. Effect of the passive recovery period
on the lactate minimum speed in sprinters and endurance runners.
J Sci Med Sport 7: 488–496, 2004.
11. Dotan, R. Reverse lactate threshold: A novel single-session
approach to reliable high-resolution estimation of the anaerobic
threshold. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 7: 141–151, 2012.
12. Emhoff, CAW, Messonnier, LA, Horning, MA, Fattor, JA, Carlson,
TJ, and Brooks, GA. Direct and indirect lactate oxidation in trained
and untrained men. J Appl Physiol 115: 829–838, 2013.
13. Hauser, T, Adam, J, and Schulz, H. Comparison of calculated and
experimental power in maximal lactate-steady state during cycling.
Theor Biol Med Model 11: 25, 2014.
14. Hauser, T, Adam, J, and Schulz, H. Comparison of selected lactate
threshold parameters with maximal lactate steady state in cycling.
Int J Sports Med 35: 517–521, 2014.
VOLUME 31 | NUMBER 12 | DECEMBER 2017 | 3495
 Modified Test for MLSS Determination
15. Heck, H, Mader, A, Hess, G, Mücke, S, Müller, R, and Hollmann, W.
Justification of the 4-mmol/l lactate threshold. Int J Sports Med 6:
117–130, 1985.
16. Heck, H, Schulz, H, and Bartmus, U. Diagnostics of anaerobic
power and capacity. Eur J Sport Sci 3: 1–23, 2003.
17. Hopkins, WG. A new view of statistics. Available at: http://www.
sportsci.org/resource/stats/. Accessed June 20, 2016.
18. Johnson, MA and Sharpe, GR. Effects of protocol design on
lactate minimum power. Int J Sports Med 32: 199–204, 2011.
19. Johnson, MA, Sharpe, GR, and Brown, PI. Investigations of the
lactate minimum test. Int J Sports Med 30: 448–454, 2009.
20. Jones, AM and Doust, JH. The validity of the lactate minimum test
for determination of the maximal lactate steady state. Med Sci Sports
Exerc 30: 1304–1313, 1998.
21. Kindermann, W, Simon, G, and Keul, J. The significance of the
aerobic-anaerobic transition for the determination of work load
intensities during endurance training. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup
Physiol 42: 25–34, 1979.
22. Knoepfli-Lenzin, C and Boutellier, U. Lactate minimum is valid to
estimate maximal lactate steady state in moderately and highly
trained subjects. J Strength Cond Res 25: 1355–1359, 2011.
the TM
3496 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
23. MacIntosh, BR, Esau, S, and Svedahl, K. The lactate minimum test
for cycling: Estimation of the maximal lactate steady state. Can J
Appl Physiol 27: 232–249, 2002.
24. Messonnier, LA, Emhoff, CAW, Fattor, JA, Horning, MA, Carlson,
TJ, and Brooks, GA. Lactate kinetics at the lactate threshold in
trained and untrained men. J Appl Physiol 114: 1593–1602, 2013.
25. Ribeiro, LFP, Gonçalves, CGS, Kater, DP, Lima, MCS, and
Gobatto, CA. Influence of recovery manipulation after
hyperlactemia induction on the lactate minimum intensity. Eur J
Appl Physiol 105: 159–165, 2009.
26. Smith, MF, Balmer, J, Coleman, DA, Bird, SR, and Davison,
RCR. Method of lactate elevation does not affect the
determination of the lactate minimum. Med Sci Sports Exerc 34:
1744–1749, 2002.
27. Sperlich, PF, Holmberg, HC, Reed, JL, Zinner, C, Mester, J, and
Sperlich, B. Individual versus standardized running protocols in the
determination of VO2max. J Sports Sci Med 14: 386–393, 2015.
28. Svedahl, K and MacIntosh, BR. Anaerobic threshold: The concept
and methods of measurement. Can J Appl Physiol 28: 299–323, 2003.
29. Tegtbur, U, Busse, MW, and Braumann, KM. Estimation of an
individual equilibrium between lactate production and catabolism
during exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc 25: 620–627, 1993.