Is there evidence for nonthermal modulation of whole body heat loss during intermittent exercise?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study compared the effect of active, passive, and inactive recoveries on whole body evaporative and dry heat loss responses during intermittent exercise at an air temperature of 30 degrees C and a relative humidity of 20%. Nine males performed three 15-min bouts of upright seated cycling at a fixed external workload of 150 W. The exercise bouts were separated by three 15-min recoveries during which participants 1) performed loadless pedaling (active recovery), 2) had their lower limbs passively compressed with inflatable sleeves (passive recovery), or 3) remained upright seated on the cycle ergometer (inactive recovery). Combined direct and indirect calorimetry was employed to measure rates of whole body evaporative heat loss (EHL) and metabolic heat production (M-W). Mean body temperature (T(b)) was calculated from esophageal and mean skin temperatures, and mean arterial pressure (MAP) was measured continuously. Active and passive recoveries both reversed the reduction in MAP associated with inactive recovery (P <or= 0.05). This response was paralleled by greater levels of EHL during active (207 +/- 53 W) and passive recoveries (203 +/- 55 W) compared with the inactive condition (168 +/- 53 W, P <or= 0.05). However, the greater rate of EHL during active recovery was paralleled by a greater M-W (194 +/- 16 W) compared with inactive recovery (149 +/- 27 W, P <or= 0.001). In contrast, M-W during passive recovery (139 +/- 20 W) was not significantly different from the inactive condition (P = 0.468). Furthermore, there were no differences in T(b) between inactive and passive conditions during the recovery periods (P = 0.820). As such, passive recovery resulted in greater levels of EHL for a given change in T(b) compared with inactive recovery (P <or= 0.05). These results strongly suggest that the progressive increase in core temperature during successive exercise/rest cycles is primarily the result of a baroreflex-mediated attenuation of postexercise whole body evaporative heat loss.
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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".