↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Positron emission tomography detects greater blood flow and less blood flow heterogeneity in the exercising skeletal muscles of old compared with young men during fatiguing contractions
Published in
Journal of Physiology, December 2013
DOI 10.1113/jphysiol.2013.264614
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate blood flow and its heterogeneity within and among the knee muscles in five young (26 ± 6 years) and five old (77 ± 6 years) healthy men with similar levels of physical activity while they performed two types of submaximal fatiguing isometric contraction that required either force or position control. Positron emission tomography (PET) and [(15)O]-H2O were used to determine blood flow at 2 min (beginning) and 12 min (end) after the start of the tasks. Young and old men had similar maximal forces and endurance times for the fatiguing tasks. Although muscle volumes were lower in the older subjects, total muscle blood flow was similar in both groups (young men: 25.8 ± 12.6 ml min(-1); old men: 25.1 ± 15.4 ml min(-1); age main effect, P = 0.77) as blood flow per unit mass of muscle in the exercising knee extensors was greater in the older (12.5 ± 6.2 ml min(-1) (100 g)(-1)) than the younger (8.6 ± 3.6 ml min(-1) (100 g)(-1)) men (age main effect, P = 0.001). Further, blood flow heterogeneity in the exercising knee extensors was significantly lower in the older (56 ± 27%) than the younger (67 ± 34%) men. Together, these data show that although skeletal muscles are smaller in older subjects, based on the intact neural drive to the muscle and the greater, less heterogeneous blood flow per gram of muscle, old fit muscle achieves adequate exercise hyperaemia.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 47 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 27%
Student > Master 10 21%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Researcher 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 11 23%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 9 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 13%
Engineering 4 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 13 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 22 January 2014.
All research outputs
#24,756,003
of 34,363,559 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Physiology
#9,598
of 12,243 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#272,210
of 377,399 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Physiology
#30
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,363,559 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,243 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 377,399 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.