Reports of the length dependence of fatigue are greatly exaggerated
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relative force depression associated with muscle fatigue is reported to be greater when assessed at short vs. long muscle lengths. This appears to be due to a rightward shift in the force-length relationship. This rightward shift may be caused by stretch of in-series structures, making sarcomere lengths shorter at any given muscle length. Submaximal force-length relationships (twitch, double pulse, 50 Hz) were evaluated before and after repetitive contractions (50 Hz, 300 ms, 1/s) in an in situ preparation of the rat medial gastrocnemius muscle. In some experiments, fascicle lengths were measured with sonomicrometry. Before repetitive stimulation, fascicle lengths were 11.3 +/- 0.8, 12.8 +/- 0.9, and 14.4 +/- 1.2 mm at lengths corresponding to -3.6, 0, and 3.6 mm where 0 is a reference length that corresponds with maximal active force for double-pulse stimulation. After repetitive stimulation, there was no change in fascicle lengths; these lengths were 11.4 +/- 0.8, 12.6 +/- 0.9, and 14.2 +/- 1.2 mm. The length dependence of fatigue was, therefore, not due to a stretch of in-series structures. Interestingly, the rightward shift that was evident when active force was calculated in the traditional way (subtraction of the passive force measured before contraction) was not seen when active force was calculated by subtracting the passive force that was associated with the fascicle length reached at the peak of the contraction. This calculation is based on the assumption that passive force decreases as the fascicles shorten during a fixed-end contraction. This alternative calculation revealed similar postfatigue absolute active force depression at all lengths. In relative terms, a length dependence of fatigue was still evident, but this was greatly diminished compared with that observed when active force was calculated with the traditional method.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".