Differential sympathetic nerve and heart rate spectral effects of nonhypotensive lower body negative pressure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lower body negative pressure (LBNP; -5 and -15 mmHg) was applied to 14 men (mean age 44 yr) to test the hypothesis that reductions in preload without effect on stroke volume or blood pressure increase selectively muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA), but not the ratio of low- to high-frequency harmonic component of spectral power (P(L)/P(H)), a coarse-graining power spectral estimate of sympathetic heart rate (HR) modulation. LBNP at -5 mmHg lowered central venous pressure and had no effect on stroke volume (Doppler) or systolic blood pressure but reduced vagal HR modulation. This latter finding, a manifestation of arterial baroreceptor unloading, refutes the concept that low levels of LBNP interrogate, selectively, cardiopulmonary reflexes. MSNA increased, whereas P(L)/P(H) and HR were unchanged. This discordance is consistent with selectivity of efferent sympathetic responses to nonhypotensive LBNP and with unloading of tonically active sympathoexcitatory atrial reflexes in some subjects. Hypotensive LBNP (-15 mmHg) increased MSNA and P(L)/P(H), but there was no correlation between these changes within subjects. Therefore, HR variability has limited utility as an estimate of the magnitude of orthostatic changes in sympathetic discharge to muscle.
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".