Muscle chemoreflex elevates muscle blood flow and O<sub>2</sub> uptake at exercise onset in nonischemic human forearm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We tested the hypothesis that increases in forearm blood flow (FBF) during the adaptive phase at the onset of moderate exercise would allow a more rapid increase in muscle O2 uptake (VO2 mus). Fifteen subjects completed forearm exercise in control (Con) and leg occlusion (Occ) conditions. In Occ, exercise of ischemic calf muscles was performed before the onset of forearm exercise to activate the muscle chemoreflex evoking a 25-mmHg increase in mean arterial pressure that was sustained during forearm exercise. Eight subjects who increased FBF during Occ compared with Con in the adaptation phase by >30 ml/min were considered "responders." For the responders, a higher VO2 mus accompanied the higher FBF only during the adaptive phase of the Occ tests, whereas there was no difference in the baseline or steady-state FBF or VO2 mus between Occ and Con. Supplying more blood flow at the onset of exercise allowed a more rapid increase in VO2 mus supporting our hypothesis that, at least for this type of exercise, O2 supply might be limiting.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".