Influence of acute dietary nitrate supplementation on oxygen delivery/consumption and limit of tolerance during progressive forearm exercise in men: a randomized crossover trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Beetroot juice (BRJ) supplementation increases nitric oxide bioavailability with hypoxia and acidosis, characteristics of high-intensity exercise. We investigated whether BRJ improved forearm oxygen delivery:demand matching in an intensity-dependent manner. Healthy men (21 ± 2.5 years) participated in a randomized crossover trial between October 2017 and May 2018 (Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada). Participants completed a forearm incremental exercise test to limit of tolerance (IET-LOT) 2.5 h post placebo (PL) versus BRJ (2 completed PL/BRJ vs. 9 completed BRJ/PL) within a 2-week period. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation. There was a significant main effect of drink (PL < BRJ; P = 0.042, ηp2 = 0.385) and drink × intensity interaction for arteriovenous oxygen difference (PL < BRJ; P = 0.03; ηp2= 0.197; 20%–50% and 90% LOT). BRJ did not influence oxygen delivery ( P = 0.893, ηp2 = 0.002), forearm blood flow ( P = 0.589, ηp2 = 0.03) (forearm vascular conductance ( P = 0.262, ηp2 = 0.124), mean arterial pressure ( P = 0.254,ηp2 = 0.128)), oxygen consumption ( P = 0.194, ηp2 = 0.179) or LOT ( P = 0.432, d = 0.247). In healthy men, BRJ did not improve forearm oxygen delivery (vasodilatory or pressor response) during IET-LOT. Increased arteriovenous oxygen difference at submaximal intensities did not significantly influence oxygen consumption or performance across the entire range of forearm exercise intensities. This study adds to the growing body of evidence that BRJ does not influence small muscle mass blood flow in humans regardless of exercise intensity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".