Three weeks of heat maintenance potentiates the benefits of heat acclimation in trained females
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We investigated whether heat adaptation (HA) could be maintained in trained females following an initial acclimation period. The experimental group (EXP, n = 11) completed 10 sessions of HA over 2 weeks, followed by nine sessions of HA maintenance (HA M ) over 3 weeks. HA was induced with home‐based stationary cycling while overdressing. A control group (CON, n = 4) was exposed to heart rate‐matched thermoneutral training. Prior to and at the end of the acclimation period (PRE, MID) and following the maintenance period (POST), , peak power output (PPO), and hemoglobin mass (Hb mass ) were determined in 18°C, before a 20 km time trial (TT) in 35°C, 45% RH. During the TT, rectal and mean skin temperature (T re , sk ), heart rate, peak cardiac output (), and sweat rate were measured. PPO increased ( p = 0.0003) and TT times decreased ( p < 0.0001) from PRE to MID and POST in EXP but not CON. , T re , sk , heart rate, and remained stable in both groups. Sweat rate only increased in EXP from PRE to POST ( p = 0.0197). Hb mass did not change in EXP. HA M potentiated hot exercise performance compared to HA, as demonstrated by improvements in both temperate and hot conditions. While HA M suffices to further develop thermal resistance, it is unsuitable to increase Hb mass following 10 days of HA or 3 weeks of HA M . Our findings demonstrate that females can achieve HA by overdressing at home for 10 days and that HA M provides further benefits.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".