Neuromuscular recovery from severe- and extreme-intensity exercise in men and women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maximal voluntary contraction force (MVC), potentiated twitch force (Qpot), and voluntary activation (%VA) recover to baseline within 90 s following extreme-intensity exercise. However, methodological limitations mask important recovery kinetics. We hypothesized reductions in MVC, Qpot, and %VA at task failure following extreme-intensity exercise would be less than following severe-intensity exercise, and Qpot and MVC following extreme-intensity exercise would show significant recovery within 120 s but remain depressed following severe-intensity exercise. Twelve subjects (6 men) completed 2 severe-intensity (40, 50% MVC) and 2 extreme-intensity (70, 80% MVC) isometric knee-extension exercise bouts to task failure (Tlim). Neuromuscular function was measured at baseline, Tlim, and through 150 s of recovery. Each intensity significantly reduced MVC and Qpot compared with baseline. MVC was greater at Tlim (p < 0.01) and at 150 s of recovery (p = 0.004) following exercise at 80% MVC compared with severe-intensity exercise. Partial recovery of MVC and Qpot were detected within 150 s following Tlim for each exercise intensity; Qpot recovered to baseline values within 150 s of recovery following exercise at 80% MVC. No differences in %VA were detected pre- to post-exercise or across recovery for any intensity. Although further analysis showed sex-specific differences in MVC and Qpot, future studies should closely examine sex-dependent responses to extreme-intensity exercise. It is clear, however, that these data reinforce that mechanisms limiting exercise tolerance during extreme-intensity exercise recover quickly. Novelty: Severe- and extreme-intensity exercise cause independent responses in fatigue accumulation and the subsequent recovery time courses. Recovery of MVC and Qpot occurs much faster following extreme-intensity exercise in both men and women.
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) | 0.002 | 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".