Carbohydrate sensing in the human mouth: effects on exercise performance and brain activity.

Exercise studies have suggested that the presence of carbohydrate in the human mouth activates regions of the brain that can enhance exercise performance but direct evidence of such a mechanism is limited. The first aim of the present study was to observe how rinsing the mouth with solutions containing glucose and maltodextrin, disguised with artificial sweetener, would affect exercise performance. The second aim was to use functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to identify the brain regions activated by these substances. In Study 1A, eight endurance-trained cyclists (VO2max 60.8 +/- 4.1 ml kg(-1) min(-1)) completed a cycle time trial (total work = 914 +/- 29 kJ) significantly faster when rinsing their mouths with a 6.4% glucose solution compared with a placebo containing saccharin (60.4 +/- 3.7 and 61.6 +/- 3.8 min, respectively, P = 0.007). The corresponding fMRI study (Study 1B) revealed that oral exposure to glucose activated reward-related brain regions, including the anterior cingulate cortex and striatum, which were unresponsive to saccharin. In Study 2A, eight endurance-trained cyclists (VO2max 57.8 +/- 3.2 ml kg(-1) min(-1)) tested the effect of rinsing with a 6.4% maltodextrin solution on exercise performance, showing it to significantly reduce the time to complete the cycle time trial (total work = 837 +/- 68 kJ) compared to an artificially sweetened placebo (62.6 +/- 4.7 and 64.6 +/- 4.9 min, respectively, P = 0.012). The second neuroimaging study (Study 2B) compared the cortical response to oral maltodextrin and glucose, revealing a similar pattern of brain activation in response to the two carbohydrate solutions, including areas of the insula/frontal operculum, orbitofrontal cortex and striatum. The results suggest that the improvement in exercise performance that is observed when carbohydrate is present in the mouth may be due to the activation of brain regions believed to be involved in reward and motor control. The findings also suggest that there may be a class of so far unidentified oral receptors that respond to carbohydrate independently of those for sweetness.

The effects of head cooling on endurance and neuroendocrine responses to exercise in warm conditions.

The present study investigated the effects of head cooling during endurance cycling on performance and the serotonergic neuroendocrine response to exercise in the heat. Subjects exercised at 75 % VO(2max) to volitional fatigue on a cycle ergometer at an ambient temperature of 29+/-1.0 degrees C, with a relative humidity of approximately 50 %. Head cooling resulted in a 51 % (p<0.01) improvement in exercise time to fatigue and Borg Scale ratings of perceived exertion were significantly lower throughout the exercise period with cooling (p<0.01). There were no indications of peripheral mechanisms of fatigue either with, or without, head cooling, indicating the importance of central mechanisms. Exercise in the heat caused the release of prolactin in response to the rise in rectal temperature. Head cooling largely abolished the prolactin response while having no effect on rectal temperature. Tympanic temperature and sinus skin temperature were reduced by head cooling and remained low throughout the exercise. It is suggested that there is a co-ordinated response to exercise involving thermoregulation, neuroendocrine secretion and behavioural adaptations that may originate in the hypothalamus or associated areas of the brain. Our results are consistent with the effects of head cooling being mediated by both direct cooling of the brain and modified cerebral artery blood flow, but an action of peripheral thermoreceptors cannot be excluded.

Ambient temperature and the pituitary hormone responses to exercise in humans.

Pituitary hormones have an important role during exercise yet relatively little is known about the stimulus for their release. Body temperature progressively increases during prolonged steady-state exercise in the heat and we have investigated the role that this may play in the release of prolactin, growth hormone and cortisol (as an indicator of adrenocorticotropic hormone) into the circulation. Fit young male subjects exercised at 73% V(O2,max) until volitional fatigue at 20 degrees C and at 35 degrees C (30% relative humidity at both temperatures). Rectal temperature and mean skin temperature were monitored and blood samples analysed for lactate, glucose, cortisol, growth hormone and prolactin concentrations. During the first 20 min, core temperature rose continuously and to a similar extent at both temperatures, while mean skin temperature was approximately 4 degrees C lower during exercise in the cool. Blood glucose concentration was essentially constant throughout the period of exercise while lactate concentration increased in the first 10 min and then remained constant with very similar changes in the two exercise conditions. Prolactin and growth hormone concentrations both increased during the exercise period while the concentration of cortisol declined slightly before rising slightly over the 40 min period. Prolactin release was significantly greater when exercise was carried out in the heat while there was no difference in the release of growth hormone or cortisol in the two conditions. When plotted as a function of rectal temperature, growth hormone concentration showed a linear relationship which was the same at ambient temperatures of 35 degrees C and 20 degrees C. Prolactin concentration had a curvilinear relationship with rectal temperature and this differed markedly at the two ambient temperatures. Cortisol concentration showed no dependence on any measure of body temperature. Our results are consistent with some aspect of body temperature being a stimulus for growth hormone and prolactin secretion; however, the precise mechanism clearly differs between the two hormones and we suggest that skin temperature modulates prolactin release, but does not affect the release of growth hormone.

Quantifying the 5-HT1A agonist action of buspirone in man.

RATIONALE: Buspirone is used as a neuroendocrine challenge in which the increase of circulating prolactin is taken as a measure of the sensitivity of central serotonergic (5-HT(1A)) pathways. Interpretation of the test is complicated, however, by the fact that buspirone possesses D(2) antagonist and 5-HT(1A) agonist activity, both of which will result in the release of prolactin. To understand the significance of prolactin secretion in response to buspirone, it is important to measure the differential actions of the two controlling pathways. OBJECTIVE: To characterise the dual action of buspirone in stimulating the secretion of prolactin by blocking the 5-HT(1A) action with the 5-HT1A antagonist action of pindolol. METHODS: Healthy male subjects (n=35) received buspirone (0.5 mg x kg bw(-1) orally) with and without pre-treatment with the 5-HT(1A) receptor antagonist pindolol (40 mg over 2 days, 0.5 mg x kg bw(-1) on test day). Nine subjects underwent two additional trials in which they received a placebo with and without pre-treatment with pindolol. RESULTS: Pindolol alone caused a small but significant reduction (18%) in the tonic release of prolactin. Buspirone alone produced a robust prolactin response which was reduced to approximately half by pindolol pre-treatment. Pindolol pre-treatment also, on average, delayed the onset and peak of the prolactin response. There was wide variation among individuals both in the absolute response to buspirone and in the proportion that could be attributed to the non-serotonergic agonist action of buspirone (22-82% IQ range). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that while serotonergic pathways play a minor role in the tonic release of prolactin, the response to a buspirone challenge alone cannot be used as a simple index of central serotonergic activity. However, if two challenges are carried out, one with buspirone and the other with buspirone plus pindolol, quantitative measures can be made of the sensitivity of both the 5-HT(1A) and the putative D(2) pathways controlling prolactin release.