ArticleIntegrative and comparative biology2025
Regional Heterogeneity in the Electromyography Activity of Extrinsic Tongue Muscles Is Critical to Tongue Function.
Article in Integrative and comparative biology, 2025. 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.
- Oral somatosensation shapes lingual muscle maps in macaque orofacial primary motor cortex.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Infant pigs demonstrate motor adaptation across multiple physiologic functions during feeding in response to dynamic changes in milk flow rate.Journal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md. : 1985) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The tongue, as a muscular hydrostat, performs several dynamic behaviors and functions, including feeding, vocalizing, and respiration. As such, this hydrostat must be capable of performing complex movements, which are powered via a set of muscles typically defined as "extrinsic" (originating outside of the tongue) and "intrinsic" (contained wholly in the tongue). These muscles are typically classified based on their gross anatomical positions and also are often ascribed functions based on these positions, with the extrinsic muscles being assigned the role of positioning the tongue, and the intrinsic muscles thought to function to shape it. For example, genioglossus is typically described as a tongue protruder, whereas hyoglossus is often described as a tongue retractor. However, the neural control of these muscles involves relatively small motor units, and defining the function of tongue muscles based on anatomy, when they occupy overlapping space and exhibit refined control may oversimplify their function. Yet, distinguishing between gross anatomical structures and refined neural control can be challenging due to the complexity of functions the tongue performs. Here, we used an infant animal model (pigs) to evaluate how the neural control of the tongue is modulated in anatomical space given a relatively simplified behavior (suckling). We tested for variation in control along the anteroposterior and dorsoventral axis of the tongue using high speed videofluoroscopy coupled with electromyography (EMG). We found variation in EMG firing timing along both axes, which correspond to differences in behaviors. Furthermore, this variation in activity is likely reflected by regional variation in function within a muscle. These data suggest that defining muscles by their anatomical structure over-simplifies their functional roles and that studies investigating the three-dimensional structure and function of the tongue should evaluate it based on regional variation in control, in the context of the behavior of interest.
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.