ArticleJournal of anatomy2018
Multivariate analysis of variations in intrinsic foot musculature among hominoids.
Article in Journal of anatomy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Torque-angle relationships of human toe flexor muscles highlight their capacity for propulsion in gait.The Journal of experimental biology · 2025Article
- A classification of the plantar intrinsic foot muscles based on the physiological cross-sectional area and muscle fiber length in healthy young adult males.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2023Article
- Associations of muscle volume of individual human plantar intrinsic foot muscles with morphological profiles of the foot.Journal of anatomy · 2022Article
- Flexor digitorum brevis utilizes elastic strain energy to contribute to both work generation and energy absorption at the foot.The Journal of experimental biology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Comparative analysis of the foot muscle architecture among extant great apes is important for understanding the evolution of the human foot and, hence, human habitual bipedal walking. However, to our knowledge, there is no previous report of a quantitative comparison of hominoid intrinsic foot muscle dimensions. In the present study, we quantitatively compared muscle dimensions of the hominoid foot by means of multivariate analysis. The foot muscle mass and physiological cross-sectional area (PCSA) of five chimpanzees, one bonobo, two gorillas, and six orangutans were obtained by our own dissections, and those of humans were taken from published accounts. The muscle mass and PCSA were respectively divided by the total mass and total PCSA of the intrinsic muscles of the entire foot for normalization. Variations in muscle architecture among human and extant great apes were quantified based on principal component analysis. Our results demonstrated that the muscle architecture of the orangutan was the most distinctive, having a larger first dorsal interosseous muscle and smaller abductor hallucis brevis muscle. On the other hand, the gorilla was found to be unique in having a larger abductor digiti minimi muscle. Humans were distinguished from extant great apes by a larger quadratus plantae muscle. The chimpanzee and the bonobo appeared to have very similar muscle architecture, with an intermediate position between the human and the orangutan. These differences (or similarities) in architecture of the intrinsic foot muscles among humans and great apes correspond well to the differences in phylogeny, positional behavior, and locomotion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.