Control schemes of ventilation
during moderate exercise [i.e., below the lactate threshold (
θ
L
)] have classically incorporated both proportional humoral feedback (carotid and central chemoreflex) and neurogenic feed forward (central command, muscle, cardiocirculatory) to provide stability of arterial PCO
2
(PaCO
2
) pH (pHa), and PO
2
(PaO
2
). In response to a step work‐rate (WR) forcing from prior rest in the upright posture,
increases abruptly for some 15–20 s, this being followed by a subsequent more‐prominent exponential component (consistent with first‐order kinetics). The lack of any sustained error signals in the mean levels of PaCO
2
, pHa, or PaO
2
, coupled with the dynamic matching of
with pulmonary CO
2
output
but not O
2
uptake or WR, suggests that the controller operates as if it incorporates an errorless humoral feedback element proportional to
(or some close proxy). In addition, the
controller seems to evidence considerable redundancy, with particular sensory deficits having little effect on the steady‐state
response to exercise or the stability of PaCO
2
between rest and exercise. Above
θ
L
,
kinetics become markedly nonlinear, with steady states being either delayed or not attained, which reflects the influence of the developing metabolic acidemia (1) indirectly, via bicarbonate‐mediated body CO
2
stores washout, which augments
; and (2) directly, to effect respiratory compensation for the falling pHa (this being constrained by the falling PaCO
2
that results from
increasing out of proportion to
). The carotid bodies are important in mediating this respiratory compensation, although with surprisingly slow kinetics, In conclusion, despite there now being general agreement regarding the overall characteristics of the
response to exercise, the precise details of the control process(es) remain unresolved.