CO<sub>2</sub> does not affect passive exercise ventilatory decline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Breathing increases abruptly at the start of passive exercise, stimulated by afferent feedback from the moving limbs, and declines toward a steady-state hyperpnea as exercise continues. This decline has been attributed to decreased arterial CO2 levels and adaptation in afferent feedback; however, the relative importance of these two mechanisms is unknown. To address this issue, we compared ventilatory responses to 5 min of passive leg extension exercise performed on 10 awake human subjects (6 men and 4 women) in isocapnic and poikilocapnic conditions. End-tidal Pco2 decreased significantly during poikilocapnic (Delta = -1.5 +/- 0.5 Torr, P < 0.001), but not isocapnic, passive exercise. Despite this difference, the ventilatory responses to passive exercise were not different between the two conditions. Using the fast changes in ventilation at the start (5.46 +/- 0.40 l/min, P < 0.001) and end (3.72 +/- 0.33 l/min, P < 0.001) of passive exercise as measures of the drive to breathe from afferent feedback, we found a decline of 68%. We conclude that the decline in ventilation during passive exercise is due to an adaptation in the afferent feedback from the moving limbs, not a decline in CO2 levels.
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".