MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072212362 · doi:10.1152/ajpregu.00257.2011

Large differences in peak oxygen uptake do not independently alter changes in core temperature and sweating during exercise

2011· article· en· W2072212362 on OpenAlexafffund
Ollie Jay, Anthony R. Bain, Tomasz M. Deren, Matthew Sacheli, Matthew N. Cramer

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsChemistryAnimal scienceOxygenCore temperatureVO2 maxThermoregulationRectal temperatureCore (optical fiber)Internal medicineMedicineHeart rateMaterials scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The independent influence of peak oxygen uptake (Vo(₂ peak)) on changes in thermoregulatory responses during exercise in a neutral climate has not been previously isolated because of complex interactions between Vo(₂ peak), metabolic heat production (H(prod)), body mass, and body surface area (BSA). It was hypothesized that Vo(₂ peak) does not independently alter changes in core temperature and sweating during exercise. Fourteen males, 7 high (HI) Vo(₂ peak): 60.1 ± 4.5 ml·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹; 7 low (LO) Vo(₂ peak): 40.3 ± 2.9 ml·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹ matched for body mass (HI: 78.2 ± 6.1 kg; LO: 78.7 ± 7.1 kg) and BSA (HI: 1.97 ± 0.08 m²; LO: 1.94 ± 0.08 m²), cycled for 60-min at 1) a fixed heat production (FHP trial) and 2) a relative exercise intensity of 60% Vo(₂ peak) (REL trial) at 24.8 ± 0.6°C, 26 ± 10% RH. In the FHP trial, H(prod) was similar between the HI (542 ± 38 W, 7.0 ± 0.6 W/kg or 275 ± 25 W/m²) and LO (535 ± 39 W, 6.9 ± 0.9 W/kg or 277 ± 29 W/m²) groups, while changes in rectal (T(re): HI: 0.87 ± 0.15°C, LO: 0.87 ± 0.18°C, P = 1.00) and aural canal (T(au): HI: 0.70 ± 0.12°C, LO: 0.74 ± 0.21°C, P = 0.65) temperature, whole-body sweat loss (WBSL) (HI: 434 ± 80 ml, LO: 440 ± 41 ml; P = 0.86), and steady-state local sweating (LSR(back)) (P = 0.40) were all similar despite relative exercise intensity being different (HI: 39.7 ± 4.2%, LO: 57.6 ± 8.0% Vo(2 peak); P = 0.001). At 60% Vo(2 peak), H(prod) was greater in the HI (834 ± 77 W, 10.7 ± 1.3 W/kg or 423 ± 44 W/m²) compared with LO (600 ± 90 W, 7.7 ± 1.4 W/kg or 310 ± 50 W/m²) group (all P < 0.001), as were changes in T(re) (HI: 1.43 ± 0.28°C, LO: 0.89 ± 0.19°C; P = 0.001) and T(au) (HI: 1.11 ± 0.21°C, LO: 0.66 ± 0.14°C; P < 0.001), and WBSL between 0 and 15, 15 and 30, 30 and 45, and 45 and 60 min (all P < 0.01), and LSR(back) (P = 0.02). The absolute esophageal temperature (T(es)) onset for sudomotor activity was ∼0.3°C lower (P < 0.05) in the HI group, but the change in T(es) from preexercise values before sweating onset was similar between groups. Sudomotor thermosensitivity during exercise were similar in both FHP (P = 0.22) and REL (P = 0.77) trials. In conclusion, changes in core temperature and sweating during exercise in a neutral climate are determined by H(prod), mass, and BSA, not Vo(₂ peak).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations140
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative PhysiologySame topicThermoregulation and physiological responsesFrench-language works237,207