ArticleThe Journal of experimental biology2024
The importance of muscle activation on the interpretation of muscle mechanical performance.
Article in The Journal of experimental biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Muscle function and electromyography: (almost) 70 years since Doty and Bosma (1956).Journal of neurophysiology · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The work loop technique was developed to assess muscle performance during cyclical length changes with phasic activation, simulating the in vivo conditions of many muscles, particularly during locomotion. To estimate muscle function in vivo, the standard approach involves subjecting a muscle to length trajectories and activation timings derived from in vivo measurements, whilst simultaneously measuring force. However, the stimulation paradigm typically used, supramaximal, 'square-wave' stimulation, does not accurately reflect the graded intensity of activation observed in vivo. While the importance of the timing and duration of stimulation within the cycle on estimates of muscle performance has long been established, the importance of graded muscle activation has not been investigated. In this study, we investigated how the activation pattern affects muscle performance by comparing square-wave, supramaximal activation with a graded in vivo activation pattern. First, we used in vivo electromyography-derived activation patterns and fibre strains from the rabbit digastric muscle during mastication and replayed them in situ. Second, we used Hill-type musculoskeletal model-derived activation patterns and fibre strains in a trotting mouse, replayed ex vivo in the soleus (SOL) and extensor digitorum longus (EDL) muscles. In the rabbit digastric muscle, square-wave activation led to an 8-fold higher estimate of net power, compared with the in vivo graded activation pattern. Similarly, in the mouse SOL and EDL, supramaximal, square-wave activation resulted in significantly greater positive and negative muscle work. These findings highlight that realistic interpretations of in vivo muscle function rely upon more accurate representations of muscle activation intensity.
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.