Developmental differences in dynamic muscle-tendon behavior: implications for movement efficiency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children perform cyclic motor tasks less efficiently than adults; however, the mechanisms underlying such differences are not fully understood. One mechanism that may contribute to these age-related differences is a differential contribution of muscles and tendons to a given muscle-tendon unit (MTU) excursion. The aims of this study were to (i) compare muscle and tendon excursion between children and adults performing vertical hopping, and (ii) determine whether children and adults choose a hopping frequency that maximizes movement efficiency, based on the utilization of energy-saving mechanisms. Twelve children (8.8±0.3 years) and 12 adults (26.0±2.1 years) performed 20 s of two-legged hopping at a self-selected frequency and at 1.33, 2.00, 2.67 and 3.33 Hz. Gastrocnemius medialis MTU excursion was estimated from kinematic data and muscle and tendon excursions were derived using a combination of 3D-motion capture and ultrasonography. Optimum hopping frequency was determined as the frequency that maximized surrogate measures of elastic energy storage potential of the tendon and minimized muscle excursion. Adults presented a significantly greater potential for elastic energy storage in combination with lower muscle excursion than children at their self-selected frequency, suggesting that children do not utilize these energy-saving mechanisms as effectively as adults. However, tendon elastic energy storage was maximized and muscle excursion minimized at the preferred frequency in both children and adults, indicating that children may select their preferred hopping frequency based on the same criteria as adults. These findings increase our understanding of the mechanisms contributing to the higher energy cost of movement performance in children, and have implications for the interpretation of age-related differences in complex task performance.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".