Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 483

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The relation between stiffness and filament overlap in stimulated frog muscle fibres.

Open access
Ford, L E, Huxley, A F, Simmons, R M·1981·The Journal of Physiology

Abstract

1. Tension transients were recorded at sarcomere lengths from 2.0 to 3.2 mum in isolated fibres from the tibialis anterior muscle of frogs during tetanic stimulation at 0‐1 degrees C. 2. The length of a selected portion of the fibre was controlled by feed‐back from a spot‐follower device. The step was complete in 0.2 ms and the natural frequency of the force transducer was 10.8 kHz. 3. The transients were analysed by comparing the tension record with the output of an analogue circuit (delay line) which contained components representing (a) force transducer response, (b) fibre inertia, (c) viscosity and inertia of surrounding fluid, (d) passive stiffness and viscosity of the fibre, (e) tendon compliance and (f) stiffness and early tension recovery of the contractile apparatus. 4. In releases at different sarcomere lengths, the instantaneous stiffness and the early tension recovery attributed to the contractile apparatus varied almost exactly in proportion to the developed tension. In the later phases of the transient there were minor deviations from proportionality. 5. The results confirm that the entire transient represents events in the cross‐bridges. 6. At full overlap, the compliance attributable to the cross‐bridges is at least 80%, and probably well over 90% of the measured instantaneous compliance of the fibre. Stiffness can therefore be used as a measure of the number of attached cross‐bridges. 7. The amount of instantaneous sliding movement of thick relative to thin filaments required to bring tension in a cross‐bridge from the isometric value to zero is about 3.9 nm if filament and Z‐line compliance are negligible, as suggested by the results. It is not however excluded that filament compliance, though small, may be sufficient to reduce this figure to 3.5 nm or possibly 3.1 nm. 8. The responses to quick stretch, unlike those to release, could not be satisfactorily matched with the delay line. The deviations suggest that the instantaneous elasticity is non‐linear in stretches. 9. In resting fibres at all sarcomere lengths, the first peak of the tension response was determined chiefly by fibre inertia and viscosity, rather than elasticity.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1113/jphysiol.1981.sp013582

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 483

Metadata

Authors
Ford, L. E., Huxley, A. F., & Simmons, R. M.
Venue
The Journal of Physiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1981-02
Volume
311
Issue
1
Pages
219-249
ISSN
  • 0022-3751 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7793
OpenAlex
W2044502834
Cited by
483
References
1
FWCI
15.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The relation between stiffness and filament overlap in stimulated frog muscle fibres. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1113/jphysiol.1981.sp013582
The paper
Ford, L. E., Huxley, A. F., & Simmons, R. M. (1981). The relation between stiffness and filament overlap in stimulated frog muscle fibres. The Journal of Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.1981.sp013582

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.