An Influence of Angiotensin II on Heat Loss Responses in Humans during Intermittent Exercise in the Heat: a Role for Oxidative Stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Angiotensin II (Ang II) has been implicated in the pathophysiology of cardiovascular disease through several mechanisms, including evoking elevations in oxidative stress. We tested the hypothesis that increases in oxidative stress induced by Ang II impair the local heat loss responses of cutaneous vasodilation and sweating. Eleven young (24 ± 4 years) healthy adults (7 males, 4 females) performed two 30‐min cycling bouts at a fixed rate of metabolic heat production (400 W; equivalent to ~47 %VO 2max ) in the heat (35 ºC). Exercise was separated by 20 and 40 min of recovery, respectively.Sweat rate (ventilated capsule) and cutaneous vascular conductance (CVC, laser‐Doppler perfusion units/mean arterial pressure) were evaluated at four skin sites receiving either: 1) lactated Ringer (Control), 2) 10 μ M Ang II, 3) 10 m M ascorbate (an antioxidant), or 4) a combination of 10 μ M Ang II + 10 m M ascorbate via microdialysis. Compared to Control, Ang II reduced both CVC and sweating at baseline rest and during each recovery (all P < 0.05). When ascorbate was co‐infused with Ang II, the effect of Ang II on CVC at baseline rest and during each recovery remained intact (all P < 0.05), whereas its effect on sweating was abolished (all P > 0.05). No differences in CVC or sweating between the four treatment sites were observed during either exercise bouts (all P > 0.05). Thus, we show that at rest and during postexercise recovery in the heat, Ang II impairs cutaneous vasodilation independent of oxidative stress, while it impairs sweating through increases in oxidative stress. Support: Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (RGPIN‐06313‐2014).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".