| Title |
Increase in carbon dioxide accelerates the performance of endurance exercise in rats
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Journal of Physiological Sciences, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12576-017-0548-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Takeshi Ueha, Keisuke Oe, Masahiko Miwa, Takumi Hasegawa, Akihiro Koh, Hanako Nishimoto, Sang Yang Lee, Takahiro Niikura, Masahiro Kurosaka, Ryosuke Kuroda, Yoshitada Sakai |
| Abstract |
Endurance exercise generates CO2 via aerobic metabolism; however, its role remains unclear. Exogenous CO2 by transcutaneous delivery promotes muscle fibre-type switching to increase endurance power in skeletal muscles. Here we determined the performance of rats running in activity wheels with/without transcutaneous CO2 exposure to clarify its effect on endurance exercise and recovery from muscle fatigue. Rats were randomised to control, training and CO2 groups. Endurance exercise included activity-wheel running with/without transcutaneous CO2 delivery. Running performance was measured after exercise initiation. We also analysed changes in muscle weight and muscle fibres in the tibialis anterior muscle. Running performance improved over the treatment period in the CO2 group, with a concomitant switch in muscle fibres to slow-type. The mitochondrial DNA content and capillary density in the CO2 group increased. CO2 was beneficial for performance and muscle development during endurance exercise: it may enhance recovery from fatigue and support anabolic metabolism in skeletal muscles. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 50% |
| Japan | 1 | 8% |
| Mexico | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 67% |
| Scientists | 4 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 21% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 4% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 3 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 11% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 15 | 54% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 May 2023.
All research outputs
#3,160,450
of 23,975,976 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Physiological Sciences
#25
of 321 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,930
of 320,201 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Physiological Sciences
#1
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,975,976 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 321 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 320,201 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.