MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093118205 · doi:10.3389/fphys.2012.00173

Size Matters: Spleen and Lung Volumes Predict Performance in Human Apneic Divers

2012· article· en· W2093118205 on OpenAlexaff
Erika Schagatay, Matt X. Richardson, Angelica Lodin‐Sundström

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Physiology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and Diving-Related Complications
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpleenLung volumesHematocritApneaSpirometryMedicineLungAnimal scienceAnesthesiaInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Humans share with seals the ability to contract the spleen and increase circulating hematocrit, which may improve apneic performance by enhancing gas storage. Seals have large spleens and while human spleen size is small in comparison, it shows great individual variation. Unlike many marine mammals, human divers rely to a great extent on lung oxygen stores, but the impact of lung volume on competitive apnea performance has never been determined. We studied if spleen- and lung size correlated with performance in elite apnea divers. Volunteers were 14 male apnea world championship participants, with a mean (SE) of 5.8 (1.2) years of previous apnea training. Spleen volume was calculated from spleen length, width, and thickness measured via ultrasound during rest, and vital capacity via spirometry. Accumulated competition scores from dives of maximal depth, time, and distance were compared to anthropometric measurements and training data. Mean (SE) diving performance was 75 (4) m for constant weight depth, 5 min 53 (39) s for static apnea and 139 (13) m for dynamic apnea distance. Subjects' mean height was 184 (2) cm, weight 82 (3) kg, vital capacity (VC) 7.3 (0.3) L and spleen volume 336 (32) mL. Spleen volume did not correlate with subject height or weight, but was positively correlated with competition score (r = 0.57; P < 0.05). Total competition score was also positively correlated with VC (r = 0.54; P < 0.05). The three highest scoring divers had the greatest spleen volumes, averaging 538 (53) mL, while the three lowest-scoring divers had a volume of 270 (71) mL (P < 0.01). VC was also greater in the high-scorers, at 7.9 (0.36) L as compared to 6.7 (0.19) L in the low scorers (P < 0.01). Spleen volume was reduced to half after 2 min of apnea in the highest scoring divers, and the estimated resting apnea time gain from the difference between high and low scorers was 15 s for spleen volume and 60 s for VC. We conclude that both spleen- and lung volume predict apnea performance in elite divers.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations86
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PhysiologySame topicCardiovascular and Diving-Related ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207