Fluid and electrolyte supplementation after prolonged moderate-intensity exercise enhances muscle glycogen resynthesis in Standardbred horses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We hypothesized that postexercise rehydration using a hypotonic electrolyte solution will increase the rate of recovery of whole body hydration, and that this is associated with increased muscle glycogen and electrolyte recovery in horses. Gluteus medius biopsies and jugular venous blood were sampled from six exercise-conditioned Standardbreds on two separate occasions, at rest and for 24 h following a competitive exercise test (CET) designed to simulate the speed and endurance test of a 3-day event. After the CETs, horses were given water ad libitum, and either a hypotonic commercial electrolyte solution (electrolyte) via nasogastric tube, followed by a typical hay/grain meal, or a hay/grain meal alone (control). The CET resulted in decreased total body water and muscle glycogen concentration of 8.4 +/- 0.3 liters and 22.6%, respectively, in the control treatment, and 8.2 +/- 0.4 liters and 21.9% in the electrolyte treatment. Electrolyte resulted in an enhanced rate of muscle glycogen resynthesis and faster restoration of hydration (as evidenced by faster recovery of plasma protein concentration, maintenance of plasma osmolality, and greater muscle intracellular fluid volume) during the recovery period compared with control. There were no differences in muscle Na, K, Cl, or Mg contents between the two treatments. It is concluded that oral administration of a hypotonic electrolyte solution after prolonged moderate-intensity exercise enhanced the rate of muscle glycogen resynthesis during the recovery period compared with control. It is speculated that postexercise dehydration may be one key contributor to the slow muscle glycogen replenishment in horses.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".