Individual variations in nitric oxide synthase‐dependent sweating in young and older males during exercise in the heat: role of aerobic power
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We evaluated the association between aerobic power (defined by peak oxygen consumption; V O 2peak ) and the contribution of nitric oxide synthase ( NOS ) to the sweating response in young and older individuals during exercise in the heat. Data from 44 young (24 ± 1 years) and 48 older (61 ± 2 years) males with mean VO 2peak of 47.8 ± 2.4 (range, 28.0–62.3) and 39.1 ± 2.3 (range, 26.4–55.7) mLO 2 kg −1 min −1 , respectively, were compiled from our prior studies. Participants performed two 15‐ to 30‐min bouts of exercise at a fixed rate of metabolic heat production of 400 or 500 W, each separated by 15–20 min recovery in the heat (35°C, relative humidity of 20%). Forearm sweat rate (ventilated capsule technique) was measured at two skin sites that were continuously and simultaneously administered with lactated Ringers solution (Control) or 10 mmol/L N G ‐nitro‐ L ‐arginine methyl ester ( L ‐ NAME , nonselective NOS inhibitor) via intradermal microdialysis. Sweat rate during the final 5 min of each exercise bout was lower with L ‐ NAME compared to the Control in both groups (all P < 0.05). The magnitude of the attenuation in sweat rate induced by L ‐ NAME compared to the Control was not correlated with V O 2peak (all P ≥ 0.46) while this attenuation was negatively correlated with the sweat rate at the Control in both groups and in both exercise bouts (all P < 0.01, R ≤ −0.43). These results suggest that NOS ‐dependent sweating is not associated with aerobic power per se , while it becomes evident in individuals who produce larger sweat rates during exercise irrespective of age.
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".