MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2346890535 · doi:10.1152/jn.01021.2015

Influence of the contractile properties of muscle on motor unit firing rates during a moderate-intensity contraction in vivo

2016· article· en· W2346890535 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Michael A. Trevino, Trent J. Herda, Andrew C. Fry, Philip M. Gallagher, John P. Vardiman, Eric M. Mosier, Jonathan D. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsIsometric exerciseMotor unit recruitmentMotor unitMyosinElectromyographyMuscle contractionContraction (grammar)AnatomyChemistryBiologyBiophysicsNeuroscienceInternal medicineMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is suggested that firing rate characteristics of motor units (MUs) are influenced by the physical properties of the muscle. However, no study has correlated MU firing rates at recruitment, targeted force, or derecruitment with the contractile properties of the muscle in vivo. Twelve participants (age = 20.67 ± 2.35 yr) performed a 40% isometric maximal voluntary contraction of the leg extensors that included linearly increasing, steady force, and decreasing segments. Muscle biopsies were collected with myosin heavy chain (MHC) content quantified, and surface electromyography (EMG) was recorded from the vastus lateralis. The EMG signal was decomposed into the firing events of single MUs. Slopes and y-intercepts were calculated for 1) firing rates at recruitment vs. recruitment threshold, 2) mean firing rates at steady force vs. recruitment threshold, and 3) firing rates at derecruitment vs. derecruitment threshold relationships for each subject. Correlations among type I %MHC isoform content and the slopes and y-intercepts from the three relationships were examined. Type I %MHC isoform content was correlated with MU firing rates at recruitment (y-intercepts: r = -0.577; slopes: r = 0.741) and targeted force (slopes: r = 0.853) vs. recruitment threshold and MU firing rates at derecruitment (y-intercept: r = -0.597; slopes: r = 0.701) vs. derecruitment threshold relationships. However, the majority of the individual MU firing rates vs. recruitment and derecruitment relationships were not significant (P > 0.05) and, thus, revealed no systematic pattern. In contrast, MU firing rates during the steady force demonstrated a systematic pattern with higher firing rates for the lower- than higher-threshold MUs and were correlated with the physical properties of MUs in vivo.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.518
Threshold uncertainty score0.190

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207