Muscle metabolic responses during 16 hours of intermittent heavy exercise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The alterations in muscle metabolism were investigated in response to repeated sessions of heavy intermittent exercise performed over 16 h. Tissue samples were extracted from the vastus lateralis muscle before (B) and after (A) 6 min of cycling at approximately 91% peak aerobic power at repetitions one (R1), two (R2), nine (R9), and sixteen (R16) in 13 untrained volunteers (peak aerobic power = 44.3 +/- 0.66 mL.kg-1.min-1, mean +/- SE). Metabolite content (mmol.(kg dry mass)-1) in homogenates at R1 indicated decreases (p < 0.05) in ATP (21.9 +/- 0.62 vs. 17.7 +/- 0.68) and phosphocreatine (80.3 +/- 2.0 vs. 8.56 +/- 1.5) and increases (p < 0.05) in inosine monophosphate (IMP, 0.077 +/- 0.12 vs. 3.63 +/- 0.85) and lactate (3.80 +/- 0.57 vs. 84.6 +/- 10.3). The content (micromol.(kg dry mass)-1) of calculated free ADP ([ADPf], 86.4 +/- 5.5 vs. 1014 +/- 237) and free AMP ([AMPf], 0.32 +/- 0.03 vs. 78.4 +/- 31) also increased (p < 0.05). No differences were observed between R1 and R2. By R9 and continuing to R16, pronounced reductions (p < 0.05) at A were observed in IMP (72.2%), [ADPf] (58.7%), [AMPf] (85.5%), and lactate (41.3%). The 16-hour protocol resulted in an 89.7% depletion (p < 0.05) of muscle glycogen. Repetition-dependent increases were also observed in oxygen consumption during exercise. It is concluded that repetitive heavy exercise results in less of a disturbance in phosphorylation potential, possibly as a result of increased mitochondrial respiration during the rest-to-work non-steady-state transition.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".