Divergent roles of plasma osmolality and the baroreflex on sweating and skin blood flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plasma hyperosmolality and baroreceptor unloading have been shown to independently influence the heat loss responses of sweating and cutaneous vasodilation. However, their combined effects remain unresolved. On four separate occasions, eight males were passively heated with a liquid-conditioned suit to 1.0°C above baseline core temperature during a resting isosmotic state (infusion of 0.9% NaCl saline) with (LBNP) and without (CON) application of lower-body negative pressure (-40 cmH2O) and during a hyperosmotic state (infusion of 3.0% NaCl saline) with (LBNP + HYP) and without (HYP) application of lower-body negative pressure. Forearm sweat rate (ventilated capsule) and skin blood flow (laser-Doppler), as well as core (esophageal) and mean skin temperatures, were measured continuously. Plasma osmolality increased by ∼10 mosmol/kgH2O during HYP and HYP + LBNP conditions, whereas it remained unchanged during CON and LBNP (P ≤ 0.05). The change in mean body temperature (0.8 × core temperature + 0.2 × mean skin temperature) at the onset threshold for increases in cutaneous vascular conductance (CVC) was significantly greater during LBNP (0.56 ± 0.24°C) and HYP (0.69 ± 0.36°C) conditions compared with CON (0.28 ± 0.23°C, P ≤ 0.05). Additionally, the onset threshold for CVC during LBNP + HYP (0.88 ± 0.33°C) was significantly greater than CON and LBNP conditions (P ≤ 0.05). In contrast, onset thresholds for sweating were not different during LBNP (0.50 ± 0.18°C) compared with CON (0.46 ± 0.26°C, P = 0.950) but were elevated (P ≤ 0.05) similarly during HYP (0.91 ± 0.37°C) and LBNP + HYP (0.94 ± 0.40°C). Our findings show an additive effect of hyperosmolality and baroreceptor unloading on the onset threshold for increases in CVC during whole body heat stress. In contrast, the onset threshold for sweating during heat stress was only elevated by hyperosmolality with no effect of the baroreflex.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".