Central excitability does not limit postfatigue voluntary activation of quadriceps femoris
Bibliographic record
Abstract
After fatigue, motor evoked potentials (MEP) elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation and cervicomedullary evoked potentials elicited by stimulation of the corticospinal tract are depressed. These reductions in corticomotor excitability and corticospinal transmission are accompanied by voluntary activation failure, but this may not reflect a causal relationship. Our purpose was to determine whether a decline in central excitability contributes to central fatigue. We hypothesized that, if central excitability limits voluntary activation, then a caffeine-induced increase in central excitability should offset voluntary activation failure. In this repeated-measures study, eight men each attended two sessions. Baseline measures of knee extension torque, maximal voluntary activation, peripheral transmission, contractile properties, and central excitability were made before administration of caffeine (6 mg/kg) or placebo. The amplitude of vastus lateralis MEPs elicited during minimal muscle activation provided a measure of central excitability. After a 1-h rest, baseline measures were repeated before, during, and after a fatigue protocol that ended when maximal voluntary torque declined by 35% (Tlim). Increased prefatigue MEP amplitude (P=0.055) and cortically evoked twitch (P<0.05) in the caffeine trial indicate that the drug increased central excitability. In the caffeine trial, increased MEP amplitude was correlated with time to task failure (r=0.74, P<0.05). Caffeine potentiated the MEP early in the fatigue protocol (P<0.05) and offset the 40% decline in placebo MEP (P<0.05) at Tlim. However, this was not associated with enhanced maximal voluntary activation during fatigue or recovery, demonstrating that voluntary activation is not limited by central excitability.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".