↓ Skip to main content

Acclimation Training Improves Endurance Cycling Performance in the Heat without Inducing Endotoxemia

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
35 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 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.
Title
Acclimation Training Improves Endurance Cycling Performance in the Heat without Inducing Endotoxemia
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, July 2016
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2016.00318
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joshua H. Guy, David B. Pyne, Glen B. Deakin, Catherine M. Miller, Andrew M. Edwards

Abstract

While the intention of endurance athletes undertaking short term heat training protocols is to rapidly gain meaningful physical adaption prior to competition in the heat, it is currently unclear whether or not this process also presents an overt, acute challenge to the immune system. The aim of this study was therefore to examine the effects of heat training on both endurance performance and biomarkers associated with inflammatory and immune system responses. Moderately-actively males (n = 24) were allocated randomly to either HOT (n = 8, 35°C, and 70% RH; NEUTRAL (n = 8, 20°C, and 45% RH); or a non-exercising control group, (CON, n = 8). Over the 18 day study HOT and NEUTRAL performed seven training sessions (40 min cycling at 55 of VO2 max) and all participants completed three heat stress tests (HST) at 35°C and 70% RH. The HST protocol comprised three × sub-maximal intervals followed by a 5 km time trial on a cycle ergometer. Serum samples were collected before and after each HST and analyzed for interleukin-6, immunoglobulin M and lipopolysaccharide. Both HOT and NEUTRAL groups experienced substantial improvement to 5 km time trial performance (HOT -33 ± 20 s, p = 0.02, NEUTRAL -39 ± 18 s, p = 0.01) but only HOT were faster (-45 ± 25 s, and -12 s ± 7 s, p = 0.01) in HST3 compared to baseline and HST2. Interleukin-6 was elevated after exercise for all groups however there were no significant changes for immunoglobulin M or lipopolysaccharide. Short-term heat training enhances 5 km cycling time trial performance in moderately-fit subjects by ~6%, similar in magnitude to exercise training in neutral conditions.Three top-up training sessions yielded a further 3% improvement in performance for the HOT group. Furthermore, the heat training did not pose a substantial challenge to the immune system.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
France 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 96 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 16%
Student > Bachelor 14 14%
Researcher 6 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 23 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 43 43%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Environmental Science 3 3%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 28 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 13 December 2016.
All research outputs
#1,673,985
of 24,965,047 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#905
of 15,337 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,201
of 374,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#13
of 171 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,965,047 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,337 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 374,842 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 171 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 92% of its contemporaries.