4.5 Article

Muscle force, work and cost: a novel technique to revisit the Fenn effect

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BIOLOGY
卷 218, 期 13, 页码 2075-2082

出版社

COMPANY OF BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/jeb.114512

关键词

Muscle mechanics; Muscle energetics; P-31 MRS; First dorsal interosseous

类别

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01 AR 41928, RC2AG036606, F32AG029064]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Muscle produces force by forming cross-bridges, using energy released from ATP. While the magnitude and duration of force production primarily determine the energy requirement, nearly a century ago Fenn observed that muscle shortening or lengthening influenced energetic cost of contraction. When work is done by the muscle, the energy cost is increased and when work is done on the muscle the energy cost is reduced. However, the magnitude of the 'Fenn effect' and its mirror ('negative Fenn effect') have not been quantitatively resolved. We describe a new technique coupling magnetic resonance spectroscopy with an in vivo force clamp that can directly quantify the Fenn effect [E= I+ W, energy liberated (E) equals the energy cost of isometric force production (I) plus the work done (W)] and the negative Fenn effect (E= I-W) for one muscle, the first dorsal interosseous (FDI). ATP cost was measured during a series of contractions, each of which occurred at a constant force and for a constant duration, thus constant force-time integral (FTI). In all subjects, as the FTI increased with load, there was a proportional linear increase in energy cost. In addition, the cost of producing force greatly increased when the muscle shortened, and was slightly reduced during lengthening contraction. These results, though limited to a single muscle, contraction velocity and muscle length change, do quantitatively support the Fenn effect. We speculate that they also suggest that an elastic element within the FDI muscle functions to preserve the force generated within the cross-bridges.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据