Brains of endurance athletes differ in the association areas but not in the primary areas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Regular participation in sports results in a series of physiological adaptations. However, little is known about the brain adaptations to physical activity. Here we aimed to investigate whether young endurance athletes and non-athletes differ in the gray and white matter of the brain and whether cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) is associated with these differences. We assessed the CRF, volumes of the gray and white matter of the brain using structural magnetic resonance imaging (sMRI), and brain white matter connections using diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (dMRI) in 20 young male endurance athletes and 21 healthy non-athletes. While total brain volume was similar in both groups, the white matter volume was larger and the gray matter volume was smaller in the athletes compared to non-athletes. The reduction of gray matter was located in the association areas of the brain that are specialized in processing of sensory stimuli. In the microstructure analysis, significant group differences were found only in the association tracts, for example, the inferior occipito-frontal fascicle (IOFF) showing higher fractional anisotropy and lower radial diffusivity, indicating stronger myelination in this tract. Additionally, gray and white matter brain volumes, as well as association tracts correlated with CRF. No changes were observed in other brain areas or tracts. In summary, the brain signature of the endurance athlete is characterized by changes in the integration of sensory and motor information in the association areas.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".