MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Oxidation rate of exogenous carbohydrate during exercise is higher in boys than in men

2003· article· en· W2084882993 on OpenAlexaff
Brian W. Timmons, Oded Bar‐Or, Michael C. Riddell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle metabolism and nutrition
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityMcMaster UniversityMcMaster Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbohydratePlaceboInternal medicineEndocrinologyAnimal scienceChemistryMedicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To determine whether the relative utilization of exogenous carbohydrate (CHO(exo)) differs between children and adults, substrate utilization during 60 min of cycling at 70% peak O(2) uptake was studied in 12 pre- and early pubertal boys (9.8 +/- 0.1 yr) and 10 men (22.1 +/- 0.5 yr) on two occasions. Subjects consumed either a placebo or a (13)C-enriched 6% CHO(exo) beverage (total volume per trial: 24 ml/kg). Substrate utilization was calculated for the final 30 min of exercise. During both trials, total fat oxidation was higher (5.4 +/- 0.5 vs. 3.0 +/- 0.4 mg x kg(-1) x min(-1), P < 0.001) and total CHO oxidation lower (27.4 +/- 1.5 vs. 34.8 +/- 1.2 mg x kg(-1) x min(-1), P < 0.001) in boys than in men, respectively. During the CHO(exo) trial, CHO(exo) oxidation was higher (P < 0.001) in boys (8.8 +/- 0.5 mg x kg(-1) x min(-1)) than in men (6.2 +/- 0.5 mg x kg(-1) x min(-1)) and provided a greater (P < 0.001) relative proportion of total energy in boys (21.8 +/- 1.4%) than in men (14.6 +/- 0.9%). These results suggest that, although endogenous CHO utilization during exercise is lower, the relative oxidation of ingested CHO is considerably higher in boys than in men. The greater reliance on CHO(exo) in boys may be important in preserving endogenous fuels and may be related to pubertal status.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations115
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysiologySame topicMuscle metabolism and nutritionFrench-language works237,207