## 4 Discussion  
The aim of this present study was to analyse how the consumption of two energy bars with different textures influenced the variables of oral processing, pedalling intensity, and the perception of satisfaction among cyclists during a cycle ergometer session. For the EX bar, the results showed higher values for the chewing duration and number of chews, as well as a lower average closing and average and minimum jaw opening width. However, there were no differences between the bars in the intensity of pedalling or perception of satisfaction, even though the athletes identified a pastier texture for the AP bar and a harder one for the EX bar. Nutritional planning is highly relevant in most competitions, especially in endurance sports such as cycling [6; 14; 39]. A wide range of ergogenic aids with a variety of flavours, \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Variable**} & **AP Bar** & **EX Bar** & \\  & **Mean \(\pm\) SD** & **Mean \(\pm\) SD** & **_p_ **(ES)** \\ \hline Torque (Nm) & 13.04 \(\pm\) 3.21 & 15.63 \(\pm\) 1.85 & \(p\) > 0.05 \\ Speed (km/h) & 24.36 \(\pm\) 2.18 & 26.16 \(\pm\) 1.47 & \(p\) > 0.05 \\ Average power (W) & 127.65 \(\pm\) 6.72 & 125.47 \(\pm\) 6.97 & \(p\) > 0.05 \\ Average cadence (p*m) & 80.36 \(\pm\) 4.49 & 77.64 \(\pm\) 1.81 & \(p\) > 0.05 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Comparison of the performance variables for the Aptonia (AP) and Etixx (EX) bars. The data are expressed as mean values with their standard deviations (_SDs_), significances (_p_), and Cohen effect sizes (ES). Figure 3: Results of the satisfaction perception survey scored from 1 (”very bad/a little”) to 5 (“very good/a lot”). Abbreviations: AP, Aptonia bar, EX, Etixx bar. No significant differences were found. shapes, and textures are currently available [40]. Of note, the timing in their ingestion, time spent consuming them, and correct oral processing could influence the performance of athletes [23; 25; 41], and so chewing behaviour can be influenced by modifying food textures [30]. Thus, several studies found more chews, longer chewing duration, speed, and muscular activity of chewing in samples with harder textures compared to soft or viscous textures [28; 42; 43]. The results from this present study agree with these previous findings, whereby the duration and number of chews was significantly greater for the EX bar compared to the AP bar. This was probably as a consequence of the drier and harder texture of the former versus the more viscous texture of the latter. However, there were no differences between the bars for chewing speed and mean, minimum, and maximum chewing times. In terms of nutritional planning during competitions, it is preferable for athletes to ingest ergogenic aids in the shortest time possible. This allows them to dedicate all their effort and attention to engaging in the exercise and reduced any respiratory difficulties caused by the oral processing of food [25]. Therefore, variables such as the duration of the chewing process and number of chews is key. Thus, the shorter duration and lower number of chews required to consume the AP bar in this current work suggests that its performance during competitions would be preferable over that of the EX bar. However, fewer chews has also been related to a lower feeling of satiety [44; 45; 46], while increased satiety and fullness could cause discomfort and perhaps the appearance of GI discomfort, nausea, and/or vomiting [41], as well as dysfunction in salivation, thereby causing heavier digestions [47]. Thus, on the basis of our results, the AP bar could, a priori, cause a lesser feeling of satiety and less GI discomfort. Another variable of interest in the oral processing of food is jaw displacement [26].