MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2953606723 · doi:10.1242/jeb.204032

Contribution of the Achilles tendon to force potentiation in stretch-shortening cycle

2019· article· en· W2953606723 on OpenAlexaff
Atsuki Fukutani, Andrew Sawatsky, T.R. Leonard, Walter Herzog

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsAchilles tendonTendonEccentricConcentricAnatomySoleus muscleElongationContraction (grammar)Materials scienceMedicineSkeletal muscleUltimate tensile strengthInternal medicinePhysicsMathematicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Muscle force during concentric contractions is potentiated by a preceding eccentric contraction; a phenomenon known as the stretch-shortening cycle (SSC) effect. Tendon elongation is often considered to be the primary factor for this force potentiation. However, direct examination of the influence of tendon elongation on the SSC effect has not been made. The aim of this study was to evaluate the contribution of tendon elongation to the SSC effect by comparing the magnitude of the SSC effect in the rat soleus with and without the Achilles tendon. The rat soleus was subjected to concentric contractions without pre-activation (CON), and concentric contractions with an eccentric pre-activation (ECC). For the condition “with” an Achilles tendon, the calcaneus was rigidly fixed to a force transducer, while for the “without” tendon condition, the soleus was fixed at the muscle-tendon junction. The SSC effect was calculated as the ratio of the mechanical work done during the concentric phase for the ECC and the CON conditions. Substantial, and similar (P=0.167) SSC effects were identified for the “with” tendon (318±86%) and the “without” tendon conditions (271±70%). The contribution of tendon elongation to the SSC effect was negligible for the rat soleus. Other factors, such as pre-activation and residual force enhancement, may cause the large SSC effects and need to be evaluated.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental Biology→Same topicMuscle activation and electromyography studies→French-language works237,207→