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

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.

[1]  W. Maclennan,et al.  The Locomotor System , 1984 .

[2]  C. R. Taylor,et al.  Force development during sustained locomotion: a determinant of gait, speed and metabolic power. , 1985, The Journal of experimental biology.

[3]  Gerrit Jan VAN INGEN SCHENAU,et al.  From rotation to translation: Constraints on multi-joint movements and the unique action of bi-articular muscles , 1989 .

[4]  R. Marsh,et al.  Mechanical performance of scallop adductor muscle during swimming , 1992, Nature.

[5]  A. Biewener,et al.  PECTORALIS MUSCLE FORCE AND POWER OUTPUT DURING DIFFERENT MODES OF FLIGHT IN PIGEONS (COLUMBA LIVIA) , 1993 .

[6]  T. Cr Relating mechanics and energetics during exercise. , 1994 .

[7]  M. S. Tu,et al.  MODULATION OF NEGATIVE WORK OUTPUT FROM A STEERING MUSCLE OF THE BLOWFLY CALLIPHORA VICINA , 1994, The Journal of experimental biology.

[8]  B. Prilutsky,et al.  Mechanical power and work of cat soleus, gastrocnemius and plantaris muscles during locomotion: possible functional significance of muscle design and force patterns. , 1996, The Journal of experimental biology.

[9]  T J Roberts,et al.  Muscular Force in Running Turkeys: The Economy of Minimizing Work , 1997, Science.

[10]  A. Biewener,et al.  In vivo pectoralis muscle force-length behavior during level flight in pigeons (Columba livia) , 1998, The Journal of experimental biology.

[11]  D R Carrier,et al.  Dynamic gearing in running dogs. , 1998, The Journal of experimental biology.

[12]  P. Carlson-Kuhta,et al.  Forms of forward quadrupedal locomotion. III. A comparison of posture, hindlimb kinematics, and motor patterns for downslope and level walking. , 1998, Journal of neurophysiology.

[13]  P. Carlson-Kuhta,et al.  Forms of forward quadrupedal locomotion. II. A comparison of posture, hindlimb kinematics, and motor patterns for upslope and level walking. , 1998, Journal of neurophysiology.

[14]  A. Biewener,et al.  In vivo muscle force-length behavior during steady-speed hopping in tammar wallabies. , 1998, The Journal of experimental biology.

[15]  A A Biewener,et al.  Muscle and Tendon Contributions to Force, Work, and Elastic Energy Savings: A Comparative Perspective , 2000, Exercise and sport sciences reviews.

[16]  R J Full,et al.  How animals move: an integrative view. , 2000, Science.

[17]  A. Biewener,et al.  Dynamics of mallard (Anas platyrynchos) gastrocnemius function during swimming versus terrestrial locomotion. , 2001, The Journal of experimental biology.

[18]  F. Nelson,et al.  The effects of speed on the in vivo activity and length of a limb muscle during the locomotion of the iguanian lizard Dipsosaurus dorsalis. , 2001, The Journal of experimental biology.

[19]  Thomas J Roberts,et al.  Mechanical power output during running accelerations in wild turkeys. , 2002, The Journal of experimental biology.

[20]  A. Biewener,et al.  Effects of surface grade on proximal hindlimb muscle strain and activation during rat locomotion. , 2002, Journal of applied physiology.

[21]  R. Full,et al.  A motor and a brake: two leg extensor muscles acting at the same joint manage energy differently in a running insect. , 2002, The Journal of experimental biology.

[22]  A. Biewener,et al.  Muscle force-length dynamics during level versus incline locomotion: a comparison of in vivo performance of two guinea fowl ankle extensors , 2003, Journal of Experimental Biology.