Interindividual variability in muscle sympathetic responses to static handgrip in young men: evidence for sympathetic responder types?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Negative and positive muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA) responders have been observed during mental stress. We hypothesized that similar MSNA response patterns could be identified during the first minute of static handgrip and contribute to the interindividual variability throughout exercise. Supine measurements of multiunit MSNA (microneurography) and continuous blood pressure (Finometer) were recorded in 29 young healthy men during the first (HG1) and second (HG2) minute of static handgrip (30% maximal voluntary contraction) and subsequent postexercise circulatory occlusion (PECO). Responders were identified on the basis of differences from the typical error of baseline total MSNA: 7 negative, 12 positive, and 10 nonresponse patterns. Positive responders demonstrated larger total MSNA responses during HG1 ( P < 0.01) and HG2 ( P < 0.0001); however, the increases in blood pressure throughout handgrip exercise were similar between all groups, as were the changes in heart rate, stroke volume, cardiac output, total vascular conductance, and respiration (all P > 0.05). Comparing negative and positive responders, total MSNA responses were similar during PECO ( P = 0.17) but opposite from HG2 to PECO (∆40 ± 46 vs. ∆-21 ± 62%, P = 0.04). Negative responders also had a shorter time-to-peak diastolic blood pressure during HG1 (20 ± 20 vs. 44 ± 14 s, P < 0.001). Total MSNA responses during HG1 were associated with responses to PECO ( r = 0.39, P < 0.05), the change from HG2 to PECO ( r = -0.49, P < 0.01), and diastolic blood pressure time to peak ( r = 0.50, P < 0.01). Overall, MSNA response patterns during the first minute of static handgrip contribute to interindividual variability and appear to be influenced by differences in central command, muscle metaboreflex activation, and rate of loading of the arterial baroreflex.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".