Cramer Matthew N, Jay Ollie
School of Human Kinetics, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; and.
School of Human Kinetics, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; and Discipline of Exercise and Sport Science, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2015 Nov 1;119(9):982-9. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00281.2015. Epub 2015 Aug 27.
Individual variation in the thermoregulatory responses to exercise is notoriously large. Although aerobic fitness (V̇o2 max) and body fatness are traditionally considered important predictors of individual core temperature and sweating responses, recent evidence indicates potentially important and independent roles for biophysical factors. Using stepwise regression, we examined the proportion of individual variability in rectal temperature changes (ΔTre), whole body sweat loss (WBSL), and steady-state local sweat rate (LSRss) independently described by 1) biophysical factors associated with metabolic heat production (Hprod) and evaporative heat balance requirements (Ereq) relative to body size and 2) factors independently related to V̇o2 max and body fatness. In a total of 69 trials, 28 males of wide-ranging morphological traits and V̇o2 max values cycled at workloads corresponding to a range of absolute Hprod (410-898 W) and relative intensities (32.2-82.0% V̇o2 max) for 60 min in 24.8 ± 0.7°C and 33.4 ± 12.2% relative humidity. Hprod (in W/kg total body mass) alone described ∼50% of the variability in ΔTre (adjusted to r(2) = 0.496; P < 0.001), whereas surface area-to-mass ratio and body fat percentage (BF%) explained an additional 4.3 and 2.3% of variability, respectively. For WBSL, Ereq (in W) alone explained ∼71% of variance (adjusted to r(2) = 0.713, P < 0.001), and the inclusion of BF% explained an additional 1.3%. Similarly, Ereq (in W/m(2)) correlated significantly with LSRss (adjusted to r(2) = 0.603, P < 0.001), whereas %V̇o2 max described an additional ∼4% of total variance. In conclusion, biophysical parameters related to Hprod, Ereq, and body size explain 54-71% of the individual variability in ΔTre, WBSL, and LSRss, and only 1-4% of additional variance is explained by factors related to fitness or fatness.
众所周知，个体对运动的体温调节反应差异极大。尽管传统上认为有氧适能（最大摄氧量）和体脂率是个体核心体温和出汗反应的重要预测指标，但最近的证据表明生物物理因素可能发挥着重要且独立的作用。我们采用逐步回归分析，研究了直肠温度变化（ΔTre）、全身出汗量（WBSL）和稳态局部出汗率（LSRss）的个体变异性中，分别由以下因素独立解释的比例：1）与相对于身体大小的代谢产热（Hprod）和蒸发散热平衡需求（Ereq）相关的生物物理因素，以及2）与最大摄氧量和体脂率独立相关的因素。在总共69次试验中，28名具有广泛形态特征和最大摄氧量值的男性，在24.8±0.7°C和33.4±12.2%相对湿度的环境下，以对应一系列绝对产热（410 - 898 W）和相对强度（32.2 - 82.0%最大摄氧量）的工作量进行60分钟的骑行。单独的Hprod（以W/千克总体重计）解释了ΔTre变异性的约50%（调整后r² = 0.496；P < 0.001），而表面积与质量比和体脂百分比（BF%）分别额外解释了4.3%和2.3%的变异性。对于WBSL，单独的Ereq（以W计）解释了约71%的方差（调整后r² = 0.713，P < 0.001），纳入BF%后又额外解释了1.3%。同样，Ereq（以W/m²计）与LSRss显著相关（调整后r² = 0.603，P < 0.001），而最大摄氧量百分比额外解释了约4%的总方差。总之，与Hprod、Ereq和身体大小相关的生物物理参数解释了ΔTre、WBSL和LSRss个体变异性的54 - 71%，而与适能或体脂相关的因素仅额外解释了1 - 4%的方差。
