30.04.2013 Views

2007, Piran, Slovenia

2007, Piran, Slovenia

2007, Piran, Slovenia

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Environmental Ergonomics XII<br />

Igor B. Mekjavic, Stelios N. Kounalakis & Nigel A.S. Taylor (Eds.), © BIOMED, Ljubljana <strong>2007</strong><br />

Invited presentation<br />

266<br />

REGIONAL DIFFERENCES IN HUMAN ECCRINE SWEAT<br />

SECRETION FOLLOWING THERMAL AND NON-THERMAL<br />

STIMULATION.<br />

Nigel A.S. Taylor, Christiano A. Machado-Moreira<br />

Human Performance Laboratories, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.<br />

Contact person: nigel_taylor@uow.edu.au<br />

INTRODUCTION<br />

In a previous communication (Taylor, 2000), we have shown, under open-loop conditions,<br />

that the skin has a generally uniform thermosensitivity. That is, with the exception of the face,<br />

sensory awareness and the feedback-effector relationship for sweating was surprisingly<br />

similar when body surfaces were presented with equivalent thermal stimuli (Cotter and<br />

Taylor, 2005).<br />

However, within the closed-loop state, there are many interactions between the cutaneous and<br />

central thermosensitive tissues. In fact, warm- and cold-sensitive hypothalamic neurons<br />

receive cutaneous, spinal and other central thermoafferent feedback, and these not only<br />

modify the firing rate of hypothalamic neurons, but also affect their sensitivity to core<br />

temperature changes. Thus, while open-loop experiments provide elemental detail pertaining<br />

to the characteristics of discretely-controlled thermoafferent signals, they do not necessarily<br />

inform us concerning the interaction of central and peripheral thermoafferents within closedloop<br />

systems, either during steady states or thermal transients.<br />

Therefore, the focus is this communication will be upon regional variations in human effector<br />

function during both endogenous and exogenous (passive) thermal loading, but with feedback<br />

loops closed (operating). The effector function of interest is eccrine sweat secretion, and we<br />

shall briefly overview this topic with respect to thermal and non-thermal stimulations prior to,<br />

and following thermal adaptation.<br />

THERMAL STIMULATION<br />

Sweat gland density: Eccrine gland density may powerfully affect segmental differences in<br />

thermal sweating. Kuno (1956) suggested that, during the first two years of life, the number of<br />

sweat glands present in adulthood is determined, with local climate influencing this process.<br />

Knip (1977) provided supporting evidence, but these data require experimental verification.<br />

While Szabo (1962) estimated that humans have about 3 million eccrine sweat glands, it has<br />

been demonstrated that the average gland density is inversely related to body surface area<br />

(Thompson, 1954; Kuno, 1956; Szabo 1962, 1967), with regional surface area growth during<br />

adolescence reducing local gland density, while the gland count remains stable.<br />

Thompson (1954) investigated active sweating using exercise and heating, and counted glands<br />

at 11 sites using the plastic-impression technique. However, the most extensive analyses of<br />

European skin specimens were performed by Szabo (1962, 1967), using surgical and biopsy<br />

samples taken from 350 donors (N=66 for the present comparisons). A large Asian cadaveric<br />

sample (N=74; Hwang and Baik, 1997) indicated lower gland density than reported by Szabo<br />

(1962). Data from all three studies are contained in Table 1.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!