Air velocity influences thermoregulation and endurance exercise capacity in the heat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the effects of variations in air velocity on time to exhaustion and thermoregulatory and perceptual responses to exercise in a hot environment. Eight male volunteers completed stationary cycle exercise trials at 70% peak oxygen uptake until exhaustion in an environmental chamber maintained at 30 °C and 50% relative humidity. Four air velocity conditions, 30, 20, 10, and 0 km/h, were tested, and the headwind was directed at the frontal aspect of the subject by 2 industrial fans, with blade diameters of 1 m and 0.5 m, set in series and positioned 3 m from the subject's chest. Mean ± SD time to exhaustion was 90 ± 17, 73 ± 16, 58 ± 13, and 41 ± 10 min in 30-, 20-, 10-, and 0-km/h trials, respectively, and was different between all trials (P < 0.05). There were progressive elevations in the rate of core temperature rise, mean skin temperature, and perceived thermal sensation as airflow decreases (P < 0.05). Core temperature, heart rate, cutaneous vascular conductance, and perceived exertion were higher and evaporative heat loss was lower without airflow than at any given airflow (P < 0.05). Dry heat loss and plasma volume were similar between trials (P > 0.05). The present study demonstrated a progressive reduction in time to exhaustion as air velocity decreases. This response is associated with a faster rate of core temperature rise and a higher skin temperature and perceived thermal stress with decreasing airflow. Moreover, airflow greater than 10 km/h (2.8 m/s) might contribute to enhancing endurance exercise capacity and reducing thermoregulatory, cardiovascular, and perceptual strain during exercise in a hot environment.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".