Changes in respiratory control after three hours of isocapnic hypoxia in humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the obvious role of hypoxia in eliciting respiratory acclimatisation in humans, the function of the peripheral chemoreflex is uncertain. We investigated this uncertainty using 3 h of isocapnic hypoxia as a stimulus (end-tidal P(CO2), 0.5–1.0 mmHg above eucapnia; end-tidal P(O2), 50 mmHg), hypothesising that this stimulus would induce an enhancement of the peripheral chemoreflex ventilatory response to hypoxia. Current evidence conflicts as to whether this enhancement is mediated by an increase in the sensitivity or a decrease in the threshold of the peripheral chemoreflex ventilatory response to carbon dioxide. Employing a modified rebreathing technique to assess chemoreflex function, we found evidence of the latter in nine healthy volunteers (six male, three female). Testing consisted of pairs of isoxic rebreathing tests at high and low levels of oxygen, performed before, immediately after and 1 h after a 3 h isocapnic hypoxic exposure. No parameters changed significantly in the high-oxygen rebreathing tests. In the low-oxygen rebreathing tests there were no changes in non-chemoreflex ventilatory drives, or in the sensitivity to carbon dioxide, but the carbon dioxide response threshold decreased (≈1.5 mmHg) immediately after exposure, and the decrease persisted for 1 h (one-way repeated-measures ANOVA; P < 0.05). We repeated the protocol in five of the original nine volunteers, but this time exposing them to isocapnic normoxia. No trends or significant changes were observed in any of the rebreathing test parameters. These findings demonstrate that in the earliest stages of acclimatisation, there is a decrease in the threshold of the peripheral chemoreflex response to carbon dioxide, which persists for at least 1 h after the return to normoxia. We suggest that ventilatory acclimatisation to hypoxia results from this decreased threshold, reflecting an increase in the activity of the peripheral chemoreflex.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".