Comprehensive Physiology Wiley Online Library
For Librarians For Authors Editors About

Microgravity

G. Kim Prisk

10.1002/cphy.c100014

Source: Volume 1, Issue 1, January 2011

Published online: January 2011

Full Article on Wiley Online Library



Abstract

Gravity profoundly affects the overall mechanics of the respiratory system. Functional residual capacity, when measured in sustained microgravity, is intermediate to that present in the standing and supine postures in 1G, consistent with early modeling studies. This change occurs almost exclusively through changes in the abdominal compliance and thus in the volume of the abdominal compartment, with the rib cage being relatively unaffected by gravity. Microgravity leaves vital capacity unaltered once the initial translocation of blood into the thorax is corrected by homeostatic mechanisms, but residual volume is reduced, likely through a more uniform distribution of alveolar size permitting deflation to a lower overall lung volume. Expiratory flows are unaffected by microgravity provided they are measured following normalization of the intrathoracic blood volume. During sleep in microgravity, there is an almost complete abolition of obstructive sleep apnea events. © 2011 American Physiological Society. Compr Physiol 1:485‐497, 2011.

Comprehensive Physiology offers downloadable PowerPoint presentations of figures for non-profit, educational use, provided the content is not modified and full credit is given to the author and publication.

Download a PowerPoint presentation of all images


Figure 1. Figure 1.

A theoretical analysis (from 1964) of the pressures on the rig cage and abdomen in the upright (left) and supine (middle) postures and in weightlessness (right). The changes in profile from the upright condition are shown as the dashed lines in the supine and weightless conditions for the purposes of comparison. The lung volume is assumed to be at 36% of vital capacity, approximating functional residual capacity (FRC) in the upright posture. Pressure across the rib cage is the sum of those across the abdomen and the diaphragm (Prc = Pab + Pdi), where Pab is the pressure on the abdominal side of the diaphragmatic dome and is itself the sum of the gravitational effects of the abdominal contents (Pabc) and the tension in the abdominal wall (Padw), that is, Pab = Pabc + Pabw. Note that before any measurements had ever been made in weightlessness, the prediction was for a reduction in FRC compared to upright. From 2, with permission.
Figure 2. Figure 2.

Lung outline tracings from five subjects from chest radiographs taken in 1G (solid lines) and in microgravity (dotted lines) during parabolic flight. Columns from left to right are anterior‐posterior views at residual volume (RV), functional residual capacity (FRC), and total lung capacity (TLC), and a left lateral view at TLC. From 40, with permission.
Figure 3. Figure 3.

(A) Strip chart recorder tracing from a subject performing an inspiratory capacity maneuver after 10 to 15 s in weightlessness during parabolic flight. The cabin G level in the aircraft is shown at the top with a period of level flight, the initial pull up at ∼1.8Gz, the period of microgravity, and the subsequent pullout at ∼1.8Gz. Changes in the volume of the abdominal compartment (Vab) and rib cage compartment (Vrc) were measured by inductive plethysmography, and changes in thoracoabdominal volume (Vw) by the sum of the two. Gas volume was measured by integration of a flowmeter. Note that changes in end expiratory Vw are almost entirely the result of changes in Vabd. From 44, with permission. (B) Changes in thoracoabdominal volume (termed Vw) as measured by inductive plethysmography, and in functional residual capacity as measured by the integration of a respiratory flowmeter in five normal subjects during parabolic flight. Note that the reduction in lung volume between 1G and microgravity was much greater than the increase in volume between 1G and 2G. From 44, with permission.
Figure 4. Figure 4.

Functional residual capacity (FRC) measured in four subjects before and during a sustained microgravity exposure of 9 days. Preflight measurements were in both the standing and supine postures. FRC in microgravity was intermediate to that in standing and supine as previously predicted 2 (see Fig. 1). From 18, with permission. *P < 0.05 compared to standing.
Figure 5. Figure 5.

Change in end‐expiratory rib cage (Vrc) and abdominal (Vab) volumes as a function of G level in five normal subjects during parabolic flight. The changes in Vrc were not significantly different from zero. From 44, with permission.
Figure 6. Figure 6.

Changes in end‐expiratory abdominal volume (A) and end‐expiratory gastric pressure (B) as a function of G level in five normal subjects during parabolic flight. Note the essentially parallel behavior between the two measurements. From 16, with permission.
Figure 7. Figure 7.

Vital capacity (VC) (both inspiratory, IVC, and expiratory, EVC) measured in four subjects over the course of 9 days of sustained microgravity. Controls in 1G were measured multiple times in the months preceding flight in both the upright and supine postures. VC was reduced on flight day 2 (after ∼24 h of exposure to microgravity) but subsequently recovered to standing control values. *P < 0.05 compared to 1G standing. From 18, with permission.
Figure 8. Figure 8.

Residual volume (RV) measured in four subjects before and during a sustained microgravity exposure of 9 days. Preflight measurements were in both the standing and supine postures. RV in microgravity was lower than that observed in standing and supine in 1G. *P < 0.05 compared to 1G standing. From 18, with permission.
Figure 9. Figure 9.

Theoretical model to explain the reduction in residual volume (RV) in microgravity seen in Figure 8. At RV, alveolar size increases from base to apex in 1G (B), but in microgravity is uniform (C). If area 2 in panel A is less than area 1, then the sum of alveolar volumes in microgravity will be less than that in 1G. From 18, with permission.
Figure 10. Figure 10.

Graphic summary of the distribution of lung volumes in the upright and supine postures in 1G and in microgravity. In summary, in microgravity, vital capacity is maintained but there are reductions in residual volume, expiratory reserve volume, and functional residual capacity. From 18, with permission.
Figure 11. Figure 11.

Comparison of the descending limbs of the maximum expiratory flow volume curves in a single subject in 1G and in microgravity during parabolic flights. Each curve is the ensemble‐averaged sum of multiple measurements in each condition, with the curves aligned at residual volume (RV), and each curve shows its associated standard error. To the right is a statistical comparison between the curves as a function of expired flow. Note that the curve from microgravity is more “scooped” than that measured in 1G (the volume at a given flow rate is higher in microgravity near RV but lower at higher lung volumes). Similar changes are seen in water immersion. From 30, with permission.
Figure 12. Figure 12.

Parameters from maximum expiratory flow volume (MEFV) curves measured in 1G in the upright and supine postures and over the course of 9 days of sustained microgravity. Forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), and their ratio follow the same pattern as vital capacity (Fig. 7) with an early inflight reduction followed by recovery. Peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) was reduced to a much greater extent, perhaps as a result of difficulties in performing the forced expirations in the novel environment (see text for details) but also subsequently recovered. *P < 0.05 compared to 1G standing. From 17, with permission.
Figure 13. Figure 13.

The abdominal contribution to tidal breathing at different accelerations in five normal subjects (one, subject L.E., was studied in two flights) during parabolic flight. The results are the averages of between 4 and 10 periods of weightlessness. Increased gravity (labeled as 2Gz but typically ∼1.8Gz) slightly decreased the abdominal contribution to tidal volume, but microgravity resulted in a substantial increase in the abdominal contribution in all subjects. From 44, with permission.
Figure 14. Figure 14.

Abdominal compliance (Cab) as a function of Gz (A) in five normal subjects (some studied in more than one flight) and the relationship between Cab and Gz (B). As Gz is decreased, Cab increases. From 16, with permission.
Figure 15. Figure 15.

The abdominal contribution to tidal breathing in sustained microgravity measured in five subjects during the night, using full polysomnography. Each subject was studied four times over the course of flight (twice in the first week, twice in the second week). The preflight data are the average of multiple nights. The awake data are shown with the associated standard error for each measurement shown by the shaded area. Awake data are from periods of quiet wakefulness during the lights out period. Light sleep refers to sleep stages 1 and 2, deep sleep to stages 3 and 4, and rapid eye movement (REM) to REM sleep. Note that there were substantial differences in the abdominal contribution to sleep between different sleep stages that persisted essentially unchanged from 1G to microgravity. Furthermore, the abdominal contribution to tidal volume was maximal early in flight and subsequently decreased. *0.05 < P < 0.1 compared to preflight and **P < 0.05 compared to preflight. From 55, with permission.
Figure 16. Figure 16.

The rate of electroencephalogram‐based arousals from sleep in five subjects before, during, and after spaceflight of ∼2 weeks duration. The rate of arousal is partitioned into those arousals preceded by a respiratory event (an apnea or hypopnea), as shown by the shaded area, and arousals bearing no such correlation. Note that in microgravity, respiratory arousals, which were primarily obstructive in nature, were almost absent. From 19, with permission.


Figure 1.

A theoretical analysis (from 1964) of the pressures on the rig cage and abdomen in the upright (left) and supine (middle) postures and in weightlessness (right). The changes in profile from the upright condition are shown as the dashed lines in the supine and weightless conditions for the purposes of comparison. The lung volume is assumed to be at 36% of vital capacity, approximating functional residual capacity (FRC) in the upright posture. Pressure across the rib cage is the sum of those across the abdomen and the diaphragm (Prc = Pab + Pdi), where Pab is the pressure on the abdominal side of the diaphragmatic dome and is itself the sum of the gravitational effects of the abdominal contents (Pabc) and the tension in the abdominal wall (Padw), that is, Pab = Pabc + Pabw. Note that before any measurements had ever been made in weightlessness, the prediction was for a reduction in FRC compared to upright. From 2, with permission.



Figure 2.

Lung outline tracings from five subjects from chest radiographs taken in 1G (solid lines) and in microgravity (dotted lines) during parabolic flight. Columns from left to right are anterior‐posterior views at residual volume (RV), functional residual capacity (FRC), and total lung capacity (TLC), and a left lateral view at TLC. From 40, with permission.



Figure 3.

(A) Strip chart recorder tracing from a subject performing an inspiratory capacity maneuver after 10 to 15 s in weightlessness during parabolic flight. The cabin G level in the aircraft is shown at the top with a period of level flight, the initial pull up at ∼1.8Gz, the period of microgravity, and the subsequent pullout at ∼1.8Gz. Changes in the volume of the abdominal compartment (Vab) and rib cage compartment (Vrc) were measured by inductive plethysmography, and changes in thoracoabdominal volume (Vw) by the sum of the two. Gas volume was measured by integration of a flowmeter. Note that changes in end expiratory Vw are almost entirely the result of changes in Vabd. From 44, with permission. (B) Changes in thoracoabdominal volume (termed Vw) as measured by inductive plethysmography, and in functional residual capacity as measured by the integration of a respiratory flowmeter in five normal subjects during parabolic flight. Note that the reduction in lung volume between 1G and microgravity was much greater than the increase in volume between 1G and 2G. From 44, with permission.



Figure 4.

Functional residual capacity (FRC) measured in four subjects before and during a sustained microgravity exposure of 9 days. Preflight measurements were in both the standing and supine postures. FRC in microgravity was intermediate to that in standing and supine as previously predicted 2 (see Fig. 1). From 18, with permission. *P < 0.05 compared to standing.



Figure 5.

Change in end‐expiratory rib cage (Vrc) and abdominal (Vab) volumes as a function of G level in five normal subjects during parabolic flight. The changes in Vrc were not significantly different from zero. From 44, with permission.



Figure 6.

Changes in end‐expiratory abdominal volume (A) and end‐expiratory gastric pressure (B) as a function of G level in five normal subjects during parabolic flight. Note the essentially parallel behavior between the two measurements. From 16, with permission.



Figure 7.

Vital capacity (VC) (both inspiratory, IVC, and expiratory, EVC) measured in four subjects over the course of 9 days of sustained microgravity. Controls in 1G were measured multiple times in the months preceding flight in both the upright and supine postures. VC was reduced on flight day 2 (after ∼24 h of exposure to microgravity) but subsequently recovered to standing control values. *P < 0.05 compared to 1G standing. From 18, with permission.



Figure 8.

Residual volume (RV) measured in four subjects before and during a sustained microgravity exposure of 9 days. Preflight measurements were in both the standing and supine postures. RV in microgravity was lower than that observed in standing and supine in 1G. *P < 0.05 compared to 1G standing. From 18, with permission.



Figure 9.

Theoretical model to explain the reduction in residual volume (RV) in microgravity seen in Figure 8. At RV, alveolar size increases from base to apex in 1G (B), but in microgravity is uniform (C). If area 2 in panel A is less than area 1, then the sum of alveolar volumes in microgravity will be less than that in 1G. From 18, with permission.



Figure 10.

Graphic summary of the distribution of lung volumes in the upright and supine postures in 1G and in microgravity. In summary, in microgravity, vital capacity is maintained but there are reductions in residual volume, expiratory reserve volume, and functional residual capacity. From 18, with permission.



Figure 11.

Comparison of the descending limbs of the maximum expiratory flow volume curves in a single subject in 1G and in microgravity during parabolic flights. Each curve is the ensemble‐averaged sum of multiple measurements in each condition, with the curves aligned at residual volume (RV), and each curve shows its associated standard error. To the right is a statistical comparison between the curves as a function of expired flow. Note that the curve from microgravity is more “scooped” than that measured in 1G (the volume at a given flow rate is higher in microgravity near RV but lower at higher lung volumes). Similar changes are seen in water immersion. From 30, with permission.



Figure 12.

Parameters from maximum expiratory flow volume (MEFV) curves measured in 1G in the upright and supine postures and over the course of 9 days of sustained microgravity. Forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), and their ratio follow the same pattern as vital capacity (Fig. 7) with an early inflight reduction followed by recovery. Peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) was reduced to a much greater extent, perhaps as a result of difficulties in performing the forced expirations in the novel environment (see text for details) but also subsequently recovered. *P < 0.05 compared to 1G standing. From 17, with permission.



Figure 13.

The abdominal contribution to tidal breathing at different accelerations in five normal subjects (one, subject L.E., was studied in two flights) during parabolic flight. The results are the averages of between 4 and 10 periods of weightlessness. Increased gravity (labeled as 2Gz but typically ∼1.8Gz) slightly decreased the abdominal contribution to tidal volume, but microgravity resulted in a substantial increase in the abdominal contribution in all subjects. From 44, with permission.



Figure 14.

Abdominal compliance (Cab) as a function of Gz (A) in five normal subjects (some studied in more than one flight) and the relationship between Cab and Gz (B). As Gz is decreased, Cab increases. From 16, with permission.



Figure 15.

The abdominal contribution to tidal breathing in sustained microgravity measured in five subjects during the night, using full polysomnography. Each subject was studied four times over the course of flight (twice in the first week, twice in the second week). The preflight data are the average of multiple nights. The awake data are shown with the associated standard error for each measurement shown by the shaded area. Awake data are from periods of quiet wakefulness during the lights out period. Light sleep refers to sleep stages 1 and 2, deep sleep to stages 3 and 4, and rapid eye movement (REM) to REM sleep. Note that there were substantial differences in the abdominal contribution to sleep between different sleep stages that persisted essentially unchanged from 1G to microgravity. Furthermore, the abdominal contribution to tidal volume was maximal early in flight and subsequently decreased. *0.05 < P < 0.1 compared to preflight and **P < 0.05 compared to preflight. From 55, with permission.



Figure 16.

The rate of electroencephalogram‐based arousals from sleep in five subjects before, during, and after spaceflight of ∼2 weeks duration. The rate of arousal is partitioned into those arousals preceded by a respiratory event (an apnea or hypopnea), as shown by the shaded area, and arousals bearing no such correlation. Note that in microgravity, respiratory arousals, which were primarily obstructive in nature, were almost absent. From 19, with permission.

References
 1. Agostoni E, Gurtner G, Torri G, Rahn H. Respiratory mechanics during submersion and negative‐pressure breathing. J Appl Physiol 21: 251–258, 1966.
 2. Agostoni E, Mead J. Statics of the respiratory system. In: Fenn WO, Rahn H, editors. Handbook of Physiology, Section 3: Respiration. Washington, DC: American Physiological Society, 1964, Vol 1, Chapt. 13, p. 387–428.
 3. Alfrey CP, Udden MM, Leach‐Huntoon C, Driscoll T, Pickett MH. Control of red blood cell mass in spaceflight. J Appl Physiol 81: 98–104, 1996.
 4. Beaumont M, Fodil R, Isabey D, Lofaso F, Touchard D, Harf A, Louis B. Gravity effects on upper airway area and lung volumes during parabolic flight. J Appl Physiol 84: 1639–1645, 1998.
 5. Berry RB, Gleeson K. Respiratory arousal from sleep: Mechanisms and significance. Sleep 20: 654–675, 1997.
 6. Bettinelli D, Kays C, Bailliart O, Capderou A, Techoueyres P, Lachaud JL, Vaida P, Miserocchi G. Effect of gravity and posture on lung mechanics. J Appl Physiol 93: 2044–2052, 2002.
 7. Bettinelli D, Kays C, Bailliart O, Capderou A, Techoueyres P, Lachaud JL, Vaida P, Miserocchi G. Effect of gravity on chest wall mechanics. J Appl Physiol 92: 709–716, 2002.
 8. Buckey JC Jr, Gaffney FA, Lane LD, Levine BD, Watenpaugh DE, Wright SJ, Yancy CW Jr, Meyer DM, Blomqvist CG. Central venous pressure in space. J Appl Physiol 81: 19–25, 1996.
 9. Buono MJ. Effect of central vascular engorgement and immersion on various lung volumes. J Appl Physiol 54: 1094–1096, 1983.
 10. Burki NK. Effects of immersion to water and changes in intrathoracic blood volume on lung function in man. Clin Sci Mol Med 51: 303–311, 1976.
 11. Castile R, Mead J, Jackson A, Wohl ME, Stokes D. Effects of posture and on flow‐volume curve configuration in normal humans. J Appl Physiol 53: 1175–1183, 1982.
 12. Dawson SV, Elliott EA. Wave‐speed limitation on expiratory flow—A unifying concept. J Appl Physiol 43: 498–515, 1977.
 13. Dellaca RL, Bettinelli D, Kays C, Techoueyres P, Lachaud JL, Vaida P, Miserocchi G. Effect of changing the gravity vector on respiratory output and control. J Appl Physiol 97: 1219–1226, 2004.
 14. Dijk DJ, Neri DF, Wyatt JK, Ronda JM, Riel E, Ritz‐de Cecco A, Hughes RJ, Elliott AR, Prisk GK, West JB, Cziesler CA. Sleep, performance, circadian rhythms, and light‐dark cycles during two space shuttle flights. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 281: R1647–R1664, 2001.
 15. Druz WS, Sharp JT. Activity of respiratory muscles in upright and recumbent humans. J Appl Physiol 51: 1552–1561, 1981.
 16. Edyvean J, Estenne M, Paiva M, Engel LA. Lung and chest wall mechanics in microgravity. J Appl Physiol 71: 1956–1966, 1991.
 17. Elliott AR, Prisk GK, Guy HJB, Kosonen JM, West JB. Forced expirations and maximum expiratory flow‐volume curves during sustained microgravity on SLS‐1. J Appl Physiol 81: 33–43, 1996.
 18. Elliott AR, Prisk GK, Guy HJB, West JB. Lung volumes during sustained microgravity on Spacelab SLS‐1. J Appl Physiol 77: 2005–2014, 1994.
 19. Elliott AR, Shea SA, Dijk DJ, Wyatt JK, Riel E, Neri DF, Cziesler CA, West JB, Prisk GK. Microgravity reduces sleep‐disordered breathing in normal humans. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 164: 478–485, 2001.
 20. Estenne M, Gorini M, Van Muylem A, Ninane V, Paiva M. Rib cage shape and motion in microgravity. J Appl Physiol 73: 946–954, 1992.
 21. Estenne M, Paiva M. Effect of gravity on respiratory system: Is it inspiratory or expiratory? J Appl Physiol 78: 757, 1995.
 22. Estenne M, Yernault JC, De Troyer A. Mechanism of relief of dyspnea after thoracocentesis in patients with large pleural effusions. Am J Med 74: 813–819, 1983.
 23. Foley MF, Tomashefski JF. Pulmonary function during zero‐gravity maneuvers. Aerosp Med 40: 655–657, 1969.
 24. Frost JD, Shumante WH, Salamy JG, Booher CR. Sleep monitoring: The second manned Skylab mission. Aviat Space Environ Med 47: 372–382, 1976.
 25. Gilmartin JJ, Wright AJ, Gibson GJ. Effects of pneumothorax or pleural effusion on pulmonary function. Thorax 40: 60–65, 1985.
 26. Gilroy RJ Jr, Lavietes MH, Loring SH, Mangura BT, Mead J. Respiratory mechanical effects of abdominal distension. J Appl Physiol 58: 1997–2003, 1985.
 27. Gleeson K, Zwillich CW, White DP. The influence of increasing ventilatory effort on arousal from sleep. Am Rev Respir Dis 142: 295–300, 1990.
 28. Grassino AE, Forkert L, Anthonisen NR. Configuration of the chest wall during increased gravitational stress in erect humans. Respir Physiol 33: 271–278, 1978.
 29. Gundel A, Polyakov VV, Zulley J. The alteration of human sleep and circadian rhythms during space flight. J Sleep Res 6: 1–8, 1997.
 30. Guy HJB, Prisk GK, Elliott AR, West JB. Maximum expiratory flow‐volume curves during short periods of microgravity. J Appl Physiol 70: 2587–2596, 1991.
 31. Hong SK, Cerretelli P, Cruz JC, Rahn H. Mechanics of respiration during submersion in water. J Appl Physiol 27: 535–538, 1969.
 32. Hudgel DW, Martin RJ, Johnson B, Hill P. Mechanics of the respiratory system and breathing pattern during sleep in normal humans. J Appl Physiol 56: 133–137, 1984.
 33. Karmali F, Shelhamer M. The dynamics of parabolic flight: Flight characteristics and passenger percepts. Acta Astronaut 63: 594–602, 2008.
 34. Khoo MCK, Koh SS, Shin JJ, Westbrook PR, Berry RB. Ventilatory dynamics during transient arousal from NREM sleep: Implications for respiratory control stability. J Appl Physiol 80: 1475–1484, 1996.
 35. Kimball WR, Kelly KB, Mead J. Thoracoabdominal blood volume change and its effect on lung and chest wall volumes. J Appl Physiol 61: 953–959, 1986.
 36. Konno K, Mead J. Measurement of separate volume changes of rib cage and abdomen during breathing. J Appl Physiol 22: 407–422, 1967.
 37. Lathers CM, Charles JB, Elton KF, Holt TA, Muckai C, Bennett C, Bungo MW. Acute hemodynamic responses to weightlessness in humans. J Clin Pharmacol 29: 615–627, 1989.
 38. Leach CS, Alfrey CP, Suki WN, Leonard JI, Rambaut PC, Inners LD, Smith SM, Lane HW, Krauhs JM. Regulation of body fluid compartments during short‐term spaceflight. J Appl Physiol 81: 105–116, 1996.
 39. Lopes JM, Tabachnik E, Muller NL, Levison H, Bryan AC. Total airway resistance and respiratory muscle activity during sleep. J Appl Physiol 54: 773–777, 1983.
 40. Michels DB, Friedman PJ, West JB. Radiographic comparison of human lung shape during normal gravity and weightlessness. J Appl Physiol 47: 851–857, 1979.
 41. Michels DB, West JB. Distribution of pulmonary ventilation and perfusion during short periods of weightlessness. J Appl Physiol 45: 987–998, 1978.
 42. Negrini D, Miserocchi G. Pulmonary interstitial fluid balance. In: Prisk GK, Paiva M, West JB, editors. Gravity and the Lung: Lessons from Microgravity. New York: Marcel Dekker, 2001, p. 255–270.
 43. Oksenberg A, Silverton DS, Arons E, Radwan H. Positional vs nonpositional obstructive sleep apnea patients. Chest 112: 629–639, 1997.
 44. Paiva M, Estenne M, Engel LA. Lung volumes, chest wall configuration, and pattern of breathing in microgravity. J Appl Physiol 67: 1542–1550, 1989.
 45. Polak AG, Lutchen KR. Computational model for forced expiration from asymmetric normal lungs. Ann Biomed Eng 31: 891–907, 2003.
 46. Prefaut C, Lupi‐H E, Anthonisen NR. Human lung mechanics during water immersion. J Appl Physiol 40: 320–323, 1976.
 47. Prisk GK, Elliott AR, Guy HJB, Kosonen JM, West JB. Pulmonary gas exchange and its determinants during sustained microgravity on Spacelabs SLS‐1 and SLS‐2. J Appl Physiol 79: 1290–1298, 1995.
 48. Prisk GK, Elliott AR, West JB. Sustained microgravity reduces the human ventilatory response to hypoxia but not hypercapnia. J Appl Physiol 88: 1421–1430, 2000.
 49. Pyszczynski D, Mink SN, Anthonisen NR. Increased gravitational stress does not alter maximum expiratory flow. J Appl Physiol 59: 28–33, 1985.
 50. Regnard J, Baudrillard P, Salah B, Dinh Xuan AT, Cabanes L, Lockhart A. Inflation of antishock trousers increases bronchial response to methacholine in healthy subjects. J Appl Physiol 68: 1528–1533, 1990.
 51. Reid MB, Banzett RB, Feldman HA, Mead J. Reflex compensation of spontaneous breathing when immersion changes diaphragm length. J Appl Physiol 58: 1136–1142, 1985.
 52. Robertson CH Jr, Engle CM, Bradley ME. Lung volumes in man immersed to the neck: Dilution and plethysmographic techniques. J Appl Physiol 44: 679–681, 1978.
 53. Robertson WG, McRae GL. Study of man during a 56‐day exposure to an oxygen‐helium atmosphere at 258 mmHg total pressure. VII. Respiratory function. Aerosp Med 37: 453–456, 1966.
 54. Rostig S, Kantelhardt JW, Penzel T, Cassel W, Peter JH, Vogelmeier C, Becker HF, Jerrentrup A. Nonrandom variability of respiration during sleep in healthy humans. Sleep 28: 411–417, 2005.
 55. Sa RC, Prisk GK, Paiva M. Microgravity alters respiratory abdominal and rib cage motion during sleep. J Appl Physiol 107: 1406–1412, 2009.
 56. Santy PA. Analysis of sleep on shuttle missions. Aviat Space Environ Med 59: 1094–1097, 1988.
 57. Sawin CF, Nicogossian AE, Rummel JA, Michel EL. Pulmonary function evaluation during the Skylab and Apollo‐Soyuz missions. Aviat Space Environ Med 47: 168–172, 1976.
 58. Sharp JT, Goldberg NB, Druz WS, Danon J. Relative contributions of rib cage and abdomen to breathing in normal subjects. J Appl Physiol 39: 608–618, 1975.
 59. Stampi C. Sleep and circadian rhythms in space. J Clin Pharmacol 34: 518–534, 1994.
 60. Tabachnik E, Muller NL, Bryan AC, Levison H. Changes in ventilation and chest wall mechanics during sleep in normal adolescents. J Appl Physiol 51: 557–564, 1981.
 61. Tenney SM. Fluid volume redistribution and thoracic volume changes during recumbency. J Appl Physiol 14: 129–132, 1959.
 62. Tusiewicz K, Moldofsky H, Bryan AC, Bryan MH. Mechanics of the rib cage and diaphragm during sleep. J Appl Physiol 43: 600–602, 1977.
 63. van de Borne P, Biston P, Paiva M, Nguyen H, Linkowski P, Degaute JP. Cardiorespiratory transfer during sleep: A study in healthy young men. Am J Physiol 269: H952–H958, 1995.
 64. Verbanck S, Larsson H, Linnarsson D, Prisk GK, West JB, Paiva M. Pulmonary tissue volume, cardiac output, and diffusing capacity in sustained microgravity. J Appl Physiol 83: 810–816, 1997.
 65. von Baumgarten RJ, Baldrighi G, Vogel H, Thumler R. Physiological response to hyper‐ and hypogravity during rollercoaster flight. Aviat Space Environ Med 51: 145–154, 1980.
 66. Wantier M, Estenne M, Verbanck S, Prisk GK, Paiva M. Chest wall mechanics in sustained microgravity. J Appl Physiol 84: 2060–2065, 1998.
 67. Wetzig J, Von Baumgarten R. Respiratory parameters aboard an aircraft performing parabolic flights. In: Proceedings of the 3rd European Symposium on Life Sciences Research in Space (ESA SP‐271), Graz, Austria, September 14‐18, 1987, p. 47–50. European Space Agency Noordwijk, NL.
 68. Wilson TA, Liu S. Effect of acceleration on the chest wall. J Appl Physiol 76: 1242–1246, 1994.
Further Reading
 1. Agostoni E, Mead J. Statics of the respiratory system. In: Fenn WO, and Rahn H, editors. Handbook of Physiology, Section 3: Respiration. Washington, DC: American Physiological Society, 1964, Vol 1, Chapt 13, p. 387–428.

Contact Editor

Submit a note to the editor about this article by filling in the form below.

* Required Field

Article Title: Microgravity
 

How to Cite

G. Kim Prisk. Microgravity. Compr Physiol 2011, 1: 485-497. doi: 10.1002/cphy.c100014