Journal of Applied Physiology Add DOIs to your references at manuscript stage!
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Appl Physiol 101: 371, 2006. First published March 24, 2006; doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00318.2006
8750-7587/06 $8.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
101/1/371    most recent
00318.2006v1
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Haouzi, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Haouzi, P.

The Last Word: Point:Counterpoint authors respond to commentaries on "Supraspinal locomotor centers do/do not contribute significantly to the hyperpnea of dynamic exercise in humans"

Philippe Haouzi

Laboratoire de Physiologie
Faculté de Médecine et CHU de Nancy
Nancy, France
e-mail: p.haouzi{at}chu-nancy.fr

To the Editor: The reactions to the debate on the role of supraspinal (hypothalamic/mesencephalic) locomotor centers (SLC) in controlling ventilation during exercise show that this question is far from futile (3). Many respiratory physiologists and neurophysiologists are still accepting the challenge of the resolution of the control of exercise hyperpnea, even after a long history of research on the topic!

I would like to respond to the various points addressed by Dr. Eldridge in his letter (3).

First, a vigorous marshalling of evidence in defense of a point of logic is a welcome and essential component of a properly scientific exchange; a jibe ("antediluvian") is not.

Second, the major problem with a model purely based on a locomotor control is that it can not account for the slow development of the normal minute ventilation (VE) response to exercise (VE time constant is 60 s; i.e., it takes 3 min for VE to reach a steady state). Eldridge argued in most of his reviews that by adding a short-term potentiation (STP) component (2), one can explain such slow dynamics. The flaw here is that the kinetics of such STP phenomemon during stimulation of the respiratory neurons is much too fast (on-time constant of few seconds; see Ref. 2 for review) to account for the VE on-transient kinetics during exercise. In addition, where has such a phenomenon been shown to operate during the on-transient of exercise in humans?

Third, the use of voluntary hyperventilation is entirely specious. What is the rational for using the observation that VE may remain slightly elevated (for 10–20 s!) after a voluntary hyperventilation (9) to explain the response to exercise? Does Eldridge assume that recovery from voluntary hyperventilation involves the same control system as exercise?

Fourth, the contribution of arterial plasma concentration ([K+]a) as a significant stimulus to breathe during exercise has been disproved by the very same group who promoted this idea (7). How? By preventing a rise in [K+]a during exercise using beta-blockers (7, 8). The result was the same VE response despite totally different [K+]a (see also Ref. 10). If so, why is Eldridge using such a mechanism as a valid hypothesis to account for VE phase II and III? Does he mean that this idea was proposed after the "deluge"?

Fifth, "what about the circulatory response?" wonders Eldridge. Mechanisms controlling both the cardiovascular and the respiratory systems according to the level of metabolic rate have been proposed (see Refs. 5 and 6 for review). Whether new ideas will hold with time depends only on the refutation from other experiments and not on dogma.

Sixth, it is difficult to see the results of Asmussen et al. (1) or Goodwin et al. (4) as proof for a role of SLC. First, the fact that contractions of partially "curarized" muscles produce an exaggerated response does not imply that the same mechanism is regulating breathing during unimpeded exercise (1). Second, what central command are we referring to here? Certainly not SLC, when dealing with static contractions (4)! Many supramedullar structures can affect VE, but whether SLC is a fundamental controller of breathing during exercise is a totally different matter.

Finally, Eldridge is far too dismissive of the implications of the considerable body of evidence suggesting a metabolic-coupled mechanism for at least part of the hyperpnea; mere correlation, he asserts! As if correlation were not an important first step toward a properly mechanistic design: it provides a signpost to the resolution—it is not an impediment. But failing to consider its logical consequences is!

REFERENCES

  1. Asmussen E, Johansen SH, Jorgensen M, and Neilsen M. On the nervous factors controlling respiration and circulation during exercise. Experiments with curarization. Acta Physiol Scand 63: 343–350, 1965.[Web of Science][Medline]
  2. Eldridge FL and Waldrop TG. Neural control of breathing during exercise. In: Exercise, Pulmonary Physiology and Pathophysiology, edited by Whipp B and Wasserman K. New York: Dekker, 1991, p. 309–370.
  3. Eldridge FL, Morin D, Romaniuk JR, Yamshiro S, Potts JT, Ichiyama RM, Bell H, Phillipson EA, Killian KJ, Jones NL, and Nattie E. Comments on Point:Counterpoint series "Supraspinal locomotor centers do/do not contribute significantly to the hyperpnea of dynamic exercise in humans." J Appl Physiol 100: 1743–1747, 2006.[Free Full Text]
  4. Goodwin GM, McCloskey DI, and Mitchell JH. Cardiovascular and respiratory responses to changes in central command during isometric exercise at constant muscle tension. J Physiol 226 :173–190, 1972.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Haouzi P, Chenuel B, and Huzczuk A. Sensing vascular distension in skeletal muscle by slow conducting afferent fibers: neurphysiological basis and implication in respiratory control. J Appl Physiol 96: 407–418, 2004.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  6. Haouzi P. Theories on the nature of coupling between ventilation and gas exchange during exercise. Respir Physiol Neurobiol. 151: 267–279, 2006.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  7. Paterson DJ. Potassium and ventilation in exercise. J Appl Physiol 72: 811–820, 1992.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Paterson DJ, Conway J, and Robbins PA. Effect of propranolol on arterial plasma potassium and ventilation during exercise in man. J Physiol 438: 116, 1991.
  9. Tawadrous FD and Eldridge FL. Posthyperventilation breathing patterns after active hyperventilation in man. J Appl Physiol 37: 353–356, 1974.[Free Full Text]
  10. Wagner MM and Mitchell GS. Ventilatory responses to hyperkaliemia and exercise in normoxic and hypoxic goat. Respir Physiol 82: 239–250, 1990.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]




This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
101/1/371    most recent
00318.2006v1
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Haouzi, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Haouzi, P.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2006 by the American Physiological Society.