Is peak oxygen uptake a determinant of moderate-duration self-paced exercise performance in the heat?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to identify whether reductions in peak oxygen uptake (VO₂(peak)) dictate performance outcomes during 30 min of self-paced exercise in the heat, which is expected to induce minimal hyperthermia. On 4 occasions, 11 male subjects completed peak and self-paced exercise in both hot (HOT, 40.2 ± 0.3 °C) and moderate (MOD; 20.4 ± 0.7 °C) conditions. During peak exercise, submaximal oxygen uptake (VO₂) was ∼8% higher in HOT, but VO₂(peak) (MOD, 4.64 ± 0.83 L·min⁻¹; HOT, 4.54 ± 0.77 L·min⁻¹) and peak cardiac output (Q(peak)) were similar. Self-paced exercise performance was reduced by ∼21% in HOT. VO₂ was similar through 15 min, but lower in HOT thereafter. Relative to MOD, this represented a higher and lower %VO₂(peak) during the initial and latter stages. Cardiac output was similar in both trials (MOD, 31.6 ± 6.6 L·min⁻¹; HOT, 30.1 ± 6.0 L·min⁻¹), representing a similar percentage of Q(peak) throughout. Rectal temperature was similar in both conditions until 30 min (MOD, 38.5 ± 0.3 °C; HOT, 38.7 ± 0.3 °C), while skin temperature was higher throughout in HOT (mean: MOD, 32.4 ± 1.1 °C; HOT, 37.3 ± 0.4 °C). Perceived exertion rose similarly in both conditions, while thermal discomfort was higher in HOT. These data indicate that when only skin temperature is elevated, reductions in exercise performance during moderate-duration self-paced exercise are not associated with changes in VO₂(peak). Rather, increases in VO₂ at a given submaximal external workload and (or) thermal discomfort appear to play a larger role.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".