Cuddy John S, Hailes Walter S, Ruby Brent C
Montana Center for Work Physiology and Exercise Metabolism, Department of Health and Human Performance, The University of Montana, 32 Campus Drive, Missoula, MT 59812-1825, USA.
J Therm Biol. 2014 Jul;43:7-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jtherbio.2014.04.002. Epub 2014 Apr 18.
The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of the core to skin temperature gradient during incremental running to volitional fatigue across varying environmental conditions. A secondary aim was to determine if a "critical" core temperature would dictate volitional fatigue during running in the heat. 60 participants (n=49 male, n=11 female; 24±5 yrs, 177±11 cm, 75±13 kg) completed the study. Participants were uniformly stratified into a specific exercise temperature group (18 °C, 26 °C, 34 °C, or 42 °C) based on a 3-mile run performance. Participants were equipped with core and chest skin temperature sensors and a heart rate monitor, entered an environmental chamber (18 °C, 26 °C, 34 °C, or 42 °C), and rested in the seated position for 10 min before performing a walk/run to volitional exhaustion. Initial treadmill speed was 3.2 km h(-1) with a 0% grade. Every 3 min, starting with speed, speed and grade increased in an alternating pattern (speed increased by 0.805 km h(-1), grade increased by 0.5%). Time to volitional fatigue was longer for the 18 °C and 26 °C group compared to the 42 °C group, (58.1±9.3 and 62.6±6.5 min vs. 51.3±8.3 min, respectively, p<0.05). At the half-way point and finish, the core to skin gradient for the 18 °C and 26 °C groups was larger compared to 42 °C group (halfway: 2.6±0.7 and 2.0±0.6 vs. 1.3±0.5 for the 18 °C, 26 °C and 42 °C groups, respectively; finish: 3.3±0.7 and 3.5±1.1 vs. 2.1±0.9 for the 26 °C, 34 °C, and 42 °C groups, respectively, p<0.05). Sweat rate was lower in the 18 °C group compared to the 26 °C, 34 °C, and 42 °C groups, 3.6±1.3 vs. 7.2±3.0, 7.1±2.0, and 7.6±1.7 g m(-2) min(-1), respectively, p<0.05. There were no group differences in core temperature and heart rate response during the exercise trials. The current data demonstrate a 13% and 22% longer run time to exhaustion for the 18 °C and 26 °C group, respectively, compared to the 42 °C group despite no differences in beginning and ending core temperatures or baseline 3-mile run time. This capacity difference appears to result from a magnified core to skin gradient via an environmental temperature advantageous to convective heat loss, and in part from an increased sweat rate.
本研究的目的是确定在不同环境条件下进行递增跑直至力竭时,核心温度与皮肤温度梯度的影响。第二个目的是确定在高温环境下跑步时,“临界”核心温度是否会决定力竭状态。60名参与者(n = 49名男性,n = 11名女性;年龄24±5岁,身高177±11厘米,体重75±13千克)完成了该研究。参与者根据3英里跑成绩被均匀分层到特定的运动温度组(18°C、26°C、34°C或42°C)。参与者配备了核心温度和胸部皮肤温度传感器以及心率监测器,进入环境舱(18°C、26°C、34°C或42°C),在进行步行/跑步至力竭前,以坐姿休息10分钟。跑步机初始速度为3.2千米/小时,坡度为0%。每3分钟,从速度开始,速度和坡度以交替模式增加(速度增加0.805千米/小时,坡度增加0.5%)。与42°C组相比,18°C和26°C组达到力竭的时间更长(分别为58.1±9.3分钟和62.6±6.5分钟,而42°C组为51.3±8.3分钟,p<0.05)。在中途点和结束时,18°C和26°C组的核心温度与皮肤温度梯度比42°C组更大(中途点:18°C、26°C和42°C组分别为2.6±0.7、2.0±0.6和1.3±0.5;结束时:26°C、34°C和42°C组分别为3.3±0.7、3.5±1.1和2.1±0.9,p<0.05)。18°C组的出汗率低于26°C、34°C和42°C组,分别为3.6±1.3克/平方米·分钟、7.2±3.0克/平方米·分钟、7.1±2.0克/平方米·分钟和7.6±1.7克/平方米·分钟,p<0.05。在运动试验期间,各组的核心温度和心率反应没有差异。当前数据表明,与42°C组相比,18°C和26°C组达到力竭的跑步时间分别长13%和22%,尽管起始和结束时的核心温度或基线3英里跑时间没有差异。这种能力差异似乎是由于环境温度有利于对流散热,导致核心温度与皮肤温度梯度增大,部分原因是出汗率增加。