Oxidation of [<sup>13</sup>C]glycerol ingested along with glucose during prolonged exercise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The respective oxidation of glycerol and glucose (0.36 g/kg each) ingested simultaneously immediately before exercise (120 min at 68 +/- 2% maximal oxygen uptake) was measured in six subjects using (13)C labeling. Indirect respiratory calorimetry corrected for protein and glycerol oxidation was used to evaluate the effect of glucose + glycerol ingestion on the oxidation of glucose and fat. Over the last 80 min of exercise, 10.0 +/- 0.8 g of exogenous glycerol were oxidized (43% of the load), while exogenous glucose oxidation was 21% higher (12.1 +/- 0.7 g or 52% of the load). However, because the energy potential of glycerol is 18% higher than that of glucose (4.57 vs. 3.87 kcal/g), the contribution of both exogenous substrates to the energy yield was similar (4.0-4.1%). Total glucose and fat oxidation were similar in the placebo (144.4 +/- 13.0 and 60.5 +/- 4.2 g, respectively) and the glucose + glycerol (135.2 +/- 12.0 and 59.4 +/- 6.5 g, respectively) trials, whereas endogenous glucose oxidation was significantly lower than in the placebo trial (123.7 +/- 11.7 vs. 144.4 +/- 13.0 g). These results indicate that exogenous glycerol can be oxidized during prolonged exercise, presumably following conversion into glucose in the liver, although direct oxidation in peripheral tissues cannot be ruled out.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".