Is <i>V</i>O<sub>2</sub> supressed during nonapnoeic facial submersion?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mammalian dive response (DR) is described as oxygen-conserving based on measures of bradycardia, peripheral vasoconstriction, and decreased ventilation (V̇ E ). Using a model of simulated diving, this study examined the effect of nonapnoeic facial submersions (NAFS) on oxygen consumption (V̇O 2 ). 19 participants performed four 2-min NAFS with 8 min of rest between each. Two submersions were performed in 5 °C water, 2 in 25 °C water. Heart rate (HR) was collected using chest strap monitors. A tube connected to the inspired port of a non-rebreathing valve allowed participants to breathe during facial submersion. Expired air was directed to a metabolic cart to determine V̇O 2 and V̇ E . Baseline (BL) HR, V̇O 2 , and V̇ E values were determined by the average during the 2 min prior to facial submersion; cold shock response (CSR) values were the maximum during the first 30 s of facial submersion; and NAFS values were the minimum during the last 90 s of facial submersion. A 2-way repeated-measures ANOVA indicated that both HR and V̇ E were greater during the CSR (92.5 ± 3.6 beats/min, 16.3 ± 0.8 L/min) compared with BL (78.9 ± 3.2 beats/min, 8.7 ± 0.4 L/min), while both were decreased from BL during the NAFS (60.0 ± 4.0 beats/min, 6.0 ± 0.4 L/min) (all, p < 0.05). HR CSR was higher and HR NAFS lower in 5 °C versus 25 °C water (p < 0.05), while V̇ E was greater in 5 °C conditions (p < 0.05). V̇O 2 exceeded BL during the CSR and decreased below BL during the NAFS (BL: 5.3 ± 0.1, CSR: 9.8 ± 0.4, NAFS: 3.1 ± 0.2 mL·kg −1 ·min −1 , p < 0.05). The data illustrate that NAFS alone contributes to the oxygen conservation associated with the human DR.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".