Advertisement

Anatomy and Embryology

, Volume 184, Issue 5, pp 441–450 | Cite as

Distribution patterns of muscle fibre types in major muscles of the bull (Bos taurus)

  • Geir K. Totland
  • Harald Kryvi
Article

Summary

The study describes the variations in distribution and cross-sectional area (fibre size) of three muscle fibre types (I, IIA, IIB) in 34 of the largest muscles of the bull (Bos taurus). The animals had been kept strictly unexercised for one year before slaughter. Representative sampling was done at 15 positions within each muscle, and from 2700 to 4500 fibres were analysed in each muscle. Different intermuscular patterns are described. The overall volume fraction (%) of type I fibres was about 10% higher in the forepart muscles than in the hindpart muscles (41% and 31%, respectively), while the mean content of type IIB fibres was similar. Type I fibres were particularly abundant in antigravity muscles. Of these, the hindlimb muscles contained 50% more type I fibres (by weight) than those of the forelimb. Typical antigravity antagonists contained very few type I fibres. In the thigh cross-section the proportion of type I fibres was highest in the anterior and medial parts, while the IIB fibres tended to be concentrated in the superficial and posterior parts. Intramuscular patterns were revealed, with type I fibres becoming gradually more abundant from superficial to deep regions, while IIB fibres had an opposite distribution. This was particularly evident in the thigh proper and in the scapular region. Within each fasciculus of all the muscles, the I fibres in the muscles of the forepart were on average about 15% larger than those of the muscles in the hindpart. The IIB fibres were on average about 10% larger in the hindpart than in the forepart muscles. A covariation between the proportion of type I and IIB fibres and their cross-sectional area was indicated.

Key words

Bovine Skeletal muscles Muscle fibre types Distribution 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ariano MA, Armstrong RB, Edgerton VR (1973) Hindlimb muscle fiber populations of five mammals. J Histochem Cytochem 21:51–55Google Scholar
  2. Armstrong RB (1980) Properties and distributions of the fiber types in the locomotory muscles of mammals. In: Schmith-Nielsen K, Taylor CR (eds) Comparative physiology: primitive mammals. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 243–254Google Scholar
  3. Armstrong RB, Phelps RO (1984) Muscle fiber type composition of the rat hindlimb. Am J Anat 171:259–272Google Scholar
  4. Armstrong RB, Saubert CW, Seeherman HJ, Taylor CR (1982) Distribution of fiber types in locomotory muscles of dogs. Am J Anat 163:87–98Google Scholar
  5. Brooke MH, Kaiser KK (1970) Three “myosin ATPase” systems. The nature of their pH liability and sulphydryl dependence. J Histochem Cytochem 18:670–672Google Scholar
  6. Burke RE (1981) Motor units: Anatomy, physiology and functional organization. In: Brooks VB (ed) Handbook of physiology. The nervous system. Am Physiol Soc, Bethesda, Md. Sect. 1, pp 345–422Google Scholar
  7. Burke RE, Edgerton VR (1975) Motor unit properties and selective involvement in movement. Exercise Sport Sci Rev 3:31–81Google Scholar
  8. Calkins CR, Dutson TR, Smith GC, Carpenter ZL, Davis GW (1981) Relationship of fiber type composition to marbling and tenderness of bovine muscles. J Food Sci 46:708–710Google Scholar
  9. Cassens RG, Cooper CC (1971) Red and white muscle. Adv Food Res 19: 1–74Google Scholar
  10. Close RI (1972) Dynamic properties of mammalian skeletal muscles. Physiol Rev 52:129–197Google Scholar
  11. Cornforth DP, Hecker AL, Cramer DA, Spindler AA, Mathias MM (1980) Maturity and its relationships to muscle characteristics of cattle. J Anim Sci 50:75–80Google Scholar
  12. Dreyer JH, Naude RT, Henning JWN, Rossouw E (1977) The influence of breed, castration and age on muscle fibre type and diameter in Friesland and Afrikaner cattle. S Afr J Sci 7:171–180Google Scholar
  13. Ellenberger W, Baum H, Dittrich O (1925) Handbuch der Anatomie der Tiere fur Künstler, 3rd edn. Dietrich, LeipzigGoogle Scholar
  14. Essen-Gustavson B, Fjelkner-Modig S (1985) Skeletal muscle characteristics in different breeds of pigs in relation to sensory properties of meat. Meat Sci 13:33–47Google Scholar
  15. Grotmol S, Totland GK, Kryvi H (1988) A general, computer-based method for study of the spatial distribution of muscle fiber types in skeletal muscle. Anat Embryol 177:421–426Google Scholar
  16. Hansen S, Cutts JH, Krause WJ, Cutts III JH (1987) Distribution of fibre types in thirty-seven muscles of Didelphis virginiana. Anat Anz 164:153–158Google Scholar
  17. Hildebrand M (1959) Motion of the running cheetah and horse. J Mammal 40:481–738Google Scholar
  18. Hildebrand M (1965) Symmetrical gaits of horses. Science 150:701–708Google Scholar
  19. Hunt MC, Hedrick HB (1977) Profile of fiber types and related properties of five bovine muscles. J Food Sci 42:513–517Google Scholar
  20. James NT (1971) The distribution of muscle fibre types in fasciculi and their analysis. J Anat 110:335–342Google Scholar
  21. Lexell J, Downham D, Sjøstrøm M (1983) Distribution of different fiber types in human skeletal muscles. A statistical and computational model for the study of fiber type grouping and early diagnosis of skeletal muscle fiber denervation and reinnervation. J Neurol Sci 61:301–314Google Scholar
  22. May ML, Dikeman ME, Schalles R (1977) Longissimus muscle histological characteristics of Simmental X Angus, Hereford X Angus and Limousin X Angus crossbred steers as related to carcass composition and meat palatability traits. J Anim Sci 44:571–580Google Scholar
  23. Newsholme SJ, Lexell J, Downham DY (1988) Distribution of fibre types and fibre sizes in the tibialis cranialis muscle of beagle dogs. J Anat 160:1–8Google Scholar
  24. Nickel R, Schummer A, Seiserle E, Frewein J, Wilkens H, Wille KH (1986) The locomotor system of the domestic animals. Paul Parey, Berlin Hamburg, pp 500Google Scholar
  25. Novikoff AB, Shin W, Drucker J (1961) Mitochondrial localization of oxidative enzymes. Staining results with two tetrazolium salts. J Biophys Biochem Cytol 9:47–61Google Scholar
  26. Pette D, Staron RS (1990) Cellular and molecular diversities of mammalian skeletal muscle fibers. Rev Physiol Biochem Pharmacol 116:2–47Google Scholar
  27. Popescu P (1986) Atlas of topographical anatomy of the domestic animals, vol 3. Saunders, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  28. Saltin B, Gollnick PD (1983) Skeletal muscle adaptability: significance for metabolism and performance. In: Peachey LD (ed) Handbook of physiology. Skeletal muscle. Am Physiol Soc, Bethesda Sect 10, pp 55–631Google Scholar
  29. Spector SA, Gardiner RF, Zernicke RR, Roy RR, Edgerton VR (1980) Muscle architecture and the force velocity characteristics of the cat soleus and medial gastrocnemius: implications for motor control. J Neurophysiol 44:951–960Google Scholar
  30. Tarrant PV (1981) In: Hood DE, Tarrant PV (eds) The problem of dark-cutting in beef. Nijhoff, HaagGoogle Scholar
  31. Totland GK, Slinde E, Kryvi H (1988) Composition of muscle fiber types and connective tissue in bovine m. semitendinosus and its relation to tenderness. Meat Sci 23:303–315Google Scholar
  32. Weibel ER, Elias H (1967) Quantitative methods in morphology. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Young OA (1984) The biochemical basis of fibre types in bovine muscle. Meat Sci 11:123–137Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Geir K. Totland
    • 1
  • Harald Kryvi
    • 1
  1. 1.Zoological LaboratoryUniversity of BergenBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations