Differential changes in muscle oxygenation between voluntary and stimulated isometric fatigue of human dorsiflexors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare fatigue and recovery of maximal voluntary torque [maximal voluntary contraction (MVC)] and muscle oxygenation after voluntary (Vol) and electrically stimulated (ES) protocols of equal torque production. On 1 day, 10 male subjects [25 yr (SD 4)] completed a Vol fatigue protocol and, on a separate day, an ES fatigue protocol of the right dorsiflexors. Each task involved 2 min of intermittent (2-s on, 1-s off) isometric contractions at 50% of MVC. For the ES protocol, stimulation was delivered percutaneously to the common peroneal nerve at a frequency of 25 Hz. Compared with the Vol protocol, the ES protocol caused a greater impairment in MVC (75 vs. 83% prefatigue value; Pre) and greater increase in 50-Hz half relaxation time (165 vs. 117% Pre) postexercise. After acute (1 min) recovery, MVC impairment was similar for both protocols, whereas 50- Hz half relaxation time was still greater in the ES than Vol protocol. Total hemoglobin decreased to a similar extent in both protocols during exercise, but it was elevated above the resting value to a significantly greater extent for the ES protocol in recovery (18 vs. 11 microM). Oxygen saturation was significantly lower in the ES than Vol protocol during exercise (46 vs. 57% Pre), but it was significantly greater during recovery (120 vs. 105% Pre). These findings suggest that despite, equal torque production, ES contractions impose a greater metabolic demand on the muscle that leads to a transient greater impairment in MVC. The enforced synchronization and fixed frequency of excitation inherent to ES are the most likely causes for the exacerbated changes in the ES compared with the Vol protocol.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".