MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2527297832 · doi:10.3389/fphys.2016.00426

The Physiological Mechanisms of Performance Enhancement with Sprint Interval Training Differ between the Upper and Lower Extremities in Humans

2016· article· en· W2527297832 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Physiology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institutes of HealthMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadHoward Hughes Medical Institute
KeywordsWingate testSprintInterval trainingMedicinePhysical therapyBlood lactatePhysical medicine and rehabilitationAnimal scienceAnaerobic exerciseInternal medicineHeart rateBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To elucidate the mechanisms underlying the differences in adaptation of arm and leg muscles to sprint training, over a period of 11 days 16 untrained men performed six sessions of 4-6x30-sec all-out sprints (SIT) with the legs and arms, separately, with a 1-h interval of recovery. Limb-specific VO2peak, sprint performance (two 30-sec Wingate tests with 4-min recovery), muscle efficiency and time-trial performance (TT, 5-min all-out) were assessed and biopsies from the m. vastus lateralis and m. triceps brachii taken before and after training. VO2peak and Wmax increased 3-11% after training, with a more pronounced change in the arms (P < 0.05). Gross efficiency improved for the arms (+8.8%, P < 0.05), but not the legs (-0.6%). Wingate peak and mean power outputs improved similarly for the arms and legs, as did TT performance. After training, VO2 during the two Wingate tests was increased by 52% and 6% for the arms and legs, respectively (P < 0.001). In the case of the arms, VO2 was higher during the first than second Wingate test (64% vs. 44%, P < 0.05). During the TT, relative exercise intensity, HR, VO2, VCO2, VE, and Vt were all lower during arm-cranking than leg-pedaling, and oxidation of fat was minimal, remaining so after training. Despite the higher relative intensity, fat oxidation was 70% greater during leg-pedaling (P = 0.017). The aerobic energy contribution in the legs was larger than for the arms during the Wingate tests, although VO2 for the arms was enhanced more by training, reducing the O2 deficit after SIT. The levels of muscle glycogen, as well as the myosin heavy chain composition were unchanged in both cases, while the activities of 3-hydroxyacyl-CoA-dehydrogenase and citrate synthase were elevated only in the legs and capillarization enhanced in both limbs. Multiple regression analysis demonstrated that the variables that predict TT performance differ for the arms and legs. The primary mechanism of adaptation to SIT by both the arms and legs is enhancement of aerobic energy production. However, with their higher proportion of fast muscle fibers, the arms exhibit greater plasticity.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it