JN Ad Instruments
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol (February 9, 2005). doi:10.1152/jn.01182.2004
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
94/1/387    most recent
01182.2004v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gazzoni, M.
Right arrow Articles by Farina, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gazzoni, M.
Right arrow Articles by Farina, D.
Submitted on November 16, 2004
Accepted on February 6, 2005

Conduction Velocity of Quiescent Muscle Fibers Decreases during Sustained Contraction

Marco Gazzoni, Federico Camelia, and Dario Farina*

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: df{at}hst.aau.dk.

We tested the hypothesis that conduction velocity of quiescent muscle fibers decreases during sustained contraction due to the activity of the active motor units in the muscle. Ten subjects trained for the identification of a target motor unit in the abductor pollicis brevis with feedback on surface EMG signals detected with a two-dimensional array of 61-electrodes. The subjects activated the target motor unit in two 10-s long contractions, before (contraction C1) and after (C3) a 3-min long contraction (C2), all in ischemic condition. The target motor unit was not activated during C2. Eight of the ten subjects (control group) performed a second experimental session identical to the first but with a resting period of 3 min instead of the contraction C2. Exerted force and target motor unit discharge rate were not different between the two subject groups and between C1 and C3 (average over C1 and C3, mean ± SD, C2-group: 15.8 ± 10.4 % MVC and 13.1 ± 1.9 pps, respectively; control group: 15.6 ± 22.1 % MVC and 14.5 ± 1.9 pps). Muscle fiber conduction velocity of the target motor unit decreased in C3 with respect to C1 in the C2-group (3.59 ± 0.57 m/s and 3.34 ± 0.47 m/s for C1 and C3, respectively; P < 0.05) but not in the control group (3.47 ± 0.68 m/s and 3.46 ± 0.73 m/s). In the C2-group, the percent decrease in conduction velocity of the target motor unit between C1 and C3 (6.4 ± 7.1%) was not significantly different from the percent decrease in the average conduction velocity of the motor units active during C2 (9.6 ± 5.4 %). In conclusion, the contraction-induced modifications in electrophysiological membrane properties of muscle fibers are partly independent on fiber activation.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
D. Farina and D. Falla
Discharge Rate of Sternohyoid Motor Units Activated With Surface EMG Feedback
J Neurophysiol, February 1, 2009; 101(2): 624 - 632.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
D. Farina, A. Holobar, M. Gazzoni, D. Zazula, R. Merletti, and R. M. Enoka
Adjustments Differ Among Low-Threshold Motor Units During Intermittent, Isometric Contractions
J Neurophysiol, January 1, 2009; 101(1): 350 - 359.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2005 by the The American Physiological Society.