Influence of endurance training on central sympathetic outflow to skeletal muscle in response to a mixed meal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nutrient intake is accompanied by increases in central sympathetic outflow, a response that has been mainly attributed to insulin. Insulin-mediated sympathoexcitation appears to be blunted in insulin-resistant conditions, suggesting that aside from peripheral insulin insensitivity, such conditions may also impair the central action of insulin in mediating sympathetic activation. What remains unclear is whether an insulin-sensitive state, such as that induced by chronic endurance training, alters the central sympathetic effects of insulin during postprandial conditions. To examine this question plasma insulin and glucose, muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA), heart rate, and arterial blood pressure were measured in 11 high-fit [HF; peak oxygen uptake (V(O(2peak))) 65.9 +/- 1.4 ml x kg(-1) x min(-1)] and 9 average-fit (AF; V(O(2peak)) 43.6 +/- 1.3 ml x kg(-1) x min(-1)) male subjects before and for 120 min after ingestion of a mixed meal drink. As expected, the insulin response to meal ingestion was lower in HF than AF participants (insulin area under the curve(0-120): 2,314 +/- 171 vs. 4,028 +/- 460 microIU x ml(-1) x 120(-1), HF vs. AF, P < 0.05), with similar plasma glucose responses between groups. Importantly, following consumption of the meal, the HF subjects demonstrated a greater rise in MSNA compared with the AF subjects (e.g., 120 min: Delta21 +/- 1 vs. 8 +/- 3 bursts/100 heart beats, HF vs. AF, P < 0.05). Furthermore, when expressed relative to plasma insulin, HF subjects exhibited a greater change in MSNA for any given change in insulin. Arterial blood pressure responses following meal intake were similar between groups. Collectively, these data suggest that, in addition to improved peripheral insulin sensitivity, endurance training may enhance the central sympathetic effect of insulin to increase MSNA following consumption of a mixed meal.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".