3.8 Article

Acute effects of dehydration on sweat composition in men during prolonged exercise in the heat

期刊

ACTA PHYSIOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA
卷 182, 期 1, 页码 37-43

出版社

BLACKWELL PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-201X.2004.01305.x

关键词

aldosterone; dehydration; exercise; heat; sweat composition; sweat gland

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim: To determine whether acute exercise-heat-induced dehydration affects sweat composition, eight males cycled for 2 h at 39.5 +/- 1.6% (V) over dot O-2peak on two separate occasions in a hot-humid environment (38.0 +/- 0.0 degreesC, 60.0 +/- 0.1% relative humidity). Methods: During exercise, subjects ingested either no fluid (dehydration) or a 20 mmol L-1 sodium chloride solution (euhydration). The volume of solution, calculated from whole-body sweat loss and determined in a familiarization trial, was ingested at 0 min and every 15 min thereafter. Venous blood was collected at 0, 60 and 120 min of exercise and sweat was aspirated from a patch located on the dominant forearm at 120 min. Results: Following the 2-h cycling exercise, sweat [Na+] and [Cl-] was greater (P < 0.05) in the dehydration trial (Na+ 91.1 +/- 6.8 mmol L-1; Cl- 73.3 +/- 3.5 mmol L-1) compared with the euhydration trial (Na+ 81.1 +/- 5.9 mmol L-1; Cl- 68.5 +/- 3.3 mmol L-1). In addition, dehydration invoked a greater serum [Na+] (142.2 +/- 0.7 mmol L-1; P < 0.05), [Cl-] (105.8 +/- 0.6 mmol L-1; P < 0.05) and [K+] (5.27 +/- 0.2 mmol L-1; P < 0.05) over the euhydration values for [Na+], [Cl-] and [K+], respectively (138.9 +/- 0.6, 102.9 +/- 0.5 and 4.88 +/- 0.1 mmol L-1). Plasma aldosterone was also significantly higher during exercise in the dehydration trial compared with the euhydration trial (53.8 +/- 3.8 vs. 40.0 +/- 4.3 ng dL(-1); P < 0.05). Conclusions: Acute exercise-heat stress without fluid replacement resulted in a greater sweat [Na+] and [Cl-] which was potentially related to greater extracellular fluid [Na+], plasma aldosterone or sympathetic nervous activity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据