Cited by 111

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Mechanical function of two ankle extensors in wild turkeys: shifts from energy production to energy absorption during incline versus decline running

Gabaldón, Annette M., Nelson, Frank E., Roberts, Thomas J.·2004·Journal of Experimental Biology

Abstract

SUMMARY: We investigated the mechanical function of two ankle extensor muscles, the lateral gastrocnemius (LG) and peroneus longus (PL), in wild turkeys Meleagris gallopavo during steady speed running. We hypothesized that mechanical work output of the LG and PL during running parallels the demand for mechanical work on the body. The turkeys ran on level, inclined (+6°,+12°) and declined (–6°, –12°) treadmills to change the demand for mechanical work. Simultaneous measurements of muscle length(from sonomicrometry) and muscle force (from tendon strain gauges) were used to calculate mechanical work output. During level running at a speed of 2 m s–1, the LG and PL were both active in stance but produced peak force at different times, at approximately 21% of stance duration for the LG and 70% for the PL. The LG and PL also had different length patterns in stance during level running. The LG underwent little shortening during force production, resulting in negligible net positive work (2.0±0.8 J kg–1). By contrast, the PL produced force across a stretch–shorten cycle in stance and did significant net positive work (4.7±1.6 J kg–1). Work outputs for both the LG and PL were directly proportional to running slope. When we increased the demand for net positive work by running the turkeys on an incline, the LG and PL increased stance net positive work output in direct proportion to slope (P<0.05). Stance net positive work output increased to 7.0±1.3 J kg–1 for the LG and 8.1±2.9 J kg–1 for the PL on the steepest incline. Increases in stance net positive work for the LG and PL were associated with increases in net shortening strain and average shortening velocity, but average force in stance remained constant. The LG and PL muscles were also effective energy absorbers during decline running, when there is demand for net negative work on the body. During decline running at 2 m s–1 on the steepest slope, the LG absorbed 4.6±2.2 J kg–1 of net work in stance and the PL absorbed 2.4±0.9 J kg–1 of net work. Shifts in muscle mechanical function from energy production during incline running to energy absorption during decline running were observed over a range of running speeds from 1–3 m s–1 for both the LG and PL. Two fundamentally different mechanisms for changing work output were apparent in the mechanical behavior of the LG and PL. The LG simply altered its length pattern; it actively shortened during incline running to produce mechanical energy and actively lengthened during decline running to absorb mechanical energy. The PL changed mechanical function by altering its length pattern and by shifting the timing of force production across its stretch–shorten cycle. During incline running, the PL produced force during late stance shortening for positive work, but during decline running,the timing of force production shifted into early stance, to align with lengthening for negative work. In addition, during decline running, the PL greatly reduced or eliminated late stance shortening, thus reducing the potential for positive work. Our results show that the changing demands for whole body work during steady speed running are met, at least in part, by an ability of single muscles to shift mechanical function from net energy production to net energy absorption.

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 · 10.1242/jeb.01006

Cites

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 20

  1. Alexander, R. M. (1974). The mechanics of jumping by a dog (Canis familiaris). J. Zool. Lond.173,549-573. · DOI
  2. Ahn, A. N. and Full, R. J. (2002). A motor and a brake: two leg extensor muscles acting at the same joint manage energy differently in a running insect. J. Exp. Biol.205,379-389. · DOI
  3. Biewener, A. A. and Corning, W. R. (2001). Dynamics of mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) gastrocnemius function during swimming versus terrestrial locomotion. J. Exp. Biol.204,1745-1756. · DOI
  4. Biewener, A. A., Corning, W. R. and Tobalske, B. W.(1998a). In vivo pectoralis muscle force–length behavior during level flight in pigeons (Columba livia). J. Exp. Biol.201,3293-3307. · DOI
  5. Biewener, A. A., Konieczynski, D. D. and Baudinette, R. V.(1998b). In vivo muscle force–length behavior during steady speed hopping in tammar wallabies. J. Exp. Biol.201,1681-1694. · DOI
  6. Carrier, D. R., Gregersen, C. S. and Silverton, N. A.(1998). Dynamic gearing in running dogs. J. Exp. Biol.201,3185-3195. · DOI
  7. Dial, K. P. and Biewener, A. A. (1993). Pectoralis muscle force and power output during different modes of flight in pigeons. J. Exp. Biol.176, 31-54. · DOI
  8. Daley, M. A. and Biewener, A. A. (2003). Muscle force–length dynamics during level versus incline locomotion: a comparison of in vivo performance of two guinea fowl ankle extensors. J. Exp. Biol.206,2941-2958. · DOI
  9. Dickinson, M. H., Farley, C. T., Full, R. J., Koehl, M. A. R.,Kram, R. and Lehman, S. (2000). How animals move: An integrative view. Science288,100-106. · DOI · Paper page
  10. Gillis, G. B. and Biewener, A. A. (2002). Effects of surface grade on proximal hindlimb muscle strain and activation during rat locomotion. J. Appl. Physiol.93,1731-1743. · DOI
  11. Marsh, R. L., Olson, J. M. and Guzik, S. K.(1992). Mechanical performance of scallop adductor muscle during swimming. Nature357,411-413. · DOI
  12. Nelson, F. E. and Jayne, B. C. (2001). The effects of speed on the in vivo activity and length of a limb muscle during the locomotion of the iguanian lizard Dipsosaurus dorsalis.J. Exp. Biol.204,3507-3522. · DOI
  13. Prilutsky, B. I., Herzog, W. and Allinger, T. L.(1996). Mechanical power and work of cat soleus, gastrocnemius and plantaris muscles during locomotion: Possible functional significance of muscle design and force patterns. J. Exp. Biol.199,801-814. · DOI
  14. Raikow, R. J. (1985). Locomotor system. In Form and Function in Birds, Vol.3 (ed. A. S. King and J. McLelland), pp.105-107. London: Academic Press.
  15. Roberts, T. J. and Scales, J. A. (2002). Mechanical power output during running accelerations in wild turkeys. J. Exp. Biol.205,1485-1494. · DOI
  16. Roberts, T. J., Marsh, R. L., Weyand, P. G. and Taylor, C. R. (1997). Muscular force in running turkeys: The economy of minimizing work. Science275,1113-1115. · DOI · Paper page
  17. Taylor, C. R. (1985). Force development during sustained locomotion: a determinant of gait, speed and metabolic power. J. Exp. Biol.115,253-262. · DOI
  18. Taylor, C. R. (1994). Relating mechanics and energetics during exercise. In Advances in Veterinary Science and Comparative Medicine, vol. 38A (ed. J. H. Jones), pp. 181-215. San Diego: Academic Press.
  19. Tu, M. S. and Dickinson, M. H. (1994). Modulation of negative work output from a steering muscle of the blowfly Calliphora vicina.J. Exp. Biol.192,207-224. · DOI
  20. Zar, J. H. (1996). Biostatistical Analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 111

Metadata

Authors
Gabaldón, A. M., Nelson, F. E., & Roberts, T. J.
Venue
Journal of Experimental Biology
Published
2004-06-01
Volume
207
Issue
13
Pages
2277-2288
ISSN
  • 1477-9145
  • 0022-0949
Cited by
111
References
0
Language
en

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