Repeated hypoxic exposures change respiratory chemoreflex control in humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. A group of seven volunteers (5 male, 2 female) were exposed to 20 min isocapnic (eucapnic) hypoxia once daily for 14 consecutive days. Their chemoreflexes were measured before and after each exposure. The same volunteers repeated the exposures with air substituted for the hypoxic gas mixture in a pseudorandom crossover design. 2. On day 1 an initial ventilatory response to hypoxia and subsequent decline was discernible in two volunteers, but the mean response for all volunteers at this stage was not significant. However, the response gradually increased, and by day 14 was discernible in six volunteers making the mean response for all volunteers significant. No change was observed over the 14 days of air exposure. 3. Only the chemoreflex threshold measured in iso-oxic (hypoxic) modified rebreathing tests changed significantly, and only for the series of exposures to hypoxia. 4. Over 14 days, the mean +/- S.E.M. threshold for all volunteers fell proportionately, from 42 +/- 1.1 mmHg on day 1 to 39 +/- 1.0 mmHg on day 14. By contrast, the mean +/- S.E.M. threshold, for all volunteers and all days, rose from 40 +/- 0.4 mmHg before to 42 +/- 0.5 mmHg after the hypoxic exposures. 5. We conclude that the enhancement of the initial ventilatory response to hypoxia induced by repeated hypoxic exposure is produced by a decrease in chemoreflex threshold. However, the decline in the ventilatory response during a single exposure is produced by an increase in the chemoreflex threshold. Since threshold changes were only found for hypoxic (iso-oxic) modified rebreathing tests, we conclude that only the peripheral chemoreflex changed.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".