Zoomorphology

, Volume 136, Issue 2, pp 267–277 | Cite as

Hind limb extensor muscle architecture reflects locomotor specialisations of a jumping and a striding quadrupedal caviomorph rodent

Original Paper
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
  • 149 Downloads

Abstract

Muscle architecture is an important factor in determining muscle function. The physiological cross-sectional area (PCSA) is directly proportional to the force-generating capacity of a muscle, while fibre length determines the capacity for a muscle’s length change. For a given muscle volume, both parameters cannot be maximised at the same time, and therefore, specialisation in accordance with specific functional demands is widely accepted. Building on this, the architecture of selected hind limb extensor muscles of two caviomorph rodent species of similar body size but with differing locomotor modes were analysed and compared. Individual fascicles of fixed cadavers were carefully removed during stepwise dissection. After removal of each fascicle, the left-behind groove within the muscle belly was digitised to capture the length and orientation of the removed fascicle. Pennation angle, muscle volume, and anatomical cross-sectional area were determined, and finally, PCSA and force-generating capacity were approximated for a hip extensor (M. biceps femoris), a knee extensor (M. vastus lateralis), and an ankle extensor (M. triceps surae). Muscle architecture appeared to reflect locomotor specialisation of a jumping (Chinchilla chinchilla) in comparison with a striding quadrupedal (Cavia porcellus) species, but considerable variability of the limited specimens analysed was found. With the biceps femoris as an exception, analysed specimens of Chinchilla had relatively more voluminous and thus metabolically expensive hind limb extensors with both a greater capacity for length change and for force generation. These results are in agreement with a greater demand for powerful hind limb extension during launches and provide further evidence that muscle architecture is adapted to differing functional demands in closely related species.

Keywords

Fascicle Functional morphology Hind limb Mammal Caviomorpha Guinea pig Chinchilla 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Heiko Stark for his help during various stages of this study. This study received funding from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), Grant No. EXC 1027 “Bild Wissen Gestaltung: ein interdisziplinäres Labor”.

Compliance with ethical standards

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Aerts P (1998) Vertical jumping in Galago senegalensis: the quest for an obligate mechanical power amplifier. Phil Trans Roy Soc B Biol Sci 353(1375):1607–1620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexander RM, Bennet-Clark HC (1977) Storage of elastic strain energy in muscle and other tissues. Nature 265(5590):114–117CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Allen V, Elsey RM, Jones N, Wright J, Hutchinson JR (2010) Functional specialization and ontogenetic scaling of limb anatomy in Alligator mississippiensis. J Anat 216(4):423–445CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Allen V, Molnar J, Parker W, Pollard A, Nolan G, Hutchinson JR (2014) Comparative architectural properties of limb muscles in Crocodylidae and Alligatoridae and their relevance to divergent use of asymmetrical gaits in extant Crocodylia. J Anat 225(6):569–582CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Biewener AA (2003) Animal locomotion. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Close RI (1972) The relations between sarcomere length and characteristics of isometric twitch contractions of frog sartorius muscle. J Physiol 220(3):745CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Daley MA, Felix G, Biewener AA (2007) Running stability is enhanced by a proximo-distal gradient in joint neuromechanical control. J Exp Biol 210(3):383–394CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Demes B, Jungers WL, Fleagle JG, Wunderlich RE, Richmond BG, Lemelin P (1996) Body size and leaping kinematics in Malagasy vertical clingers and leapers. J Hum Evol 31(4):367–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Demes B, Fleagle JG, Lemelin P (1998) Myological correlates of prosimian leaping. J Hum Evol 34(4):385–399CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Demes B, Franz TM, Carlson KJ (2005) External forces on the limbs of jumping lemurs at takeoff and landing. Am J Phys Anthropol 128(2):348–358CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Dick TJ, Clemente CJ (2016) How to build your dragon: scaling of muscle architecture from the world’s smallest to the world’s largest monitor lizard. Front Zool 13(1):1. doi: 10.1186/s12983-01-0141-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dumas GA, Poulin MJ, Roy B, Gagnon M, Jovanovic M (1988) A three-dimensional digitization method to measure trunk muscle lines of action. Spine 13:532–541CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Elissamburu A, Vizcaíno SF (2004) Limb proportions and adaptations in caviomorph rodents (Rodentia: Caviomorpha). J Zool 262(02):145–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Epstein M, Herzog W (1998) Theoretical models of skeletal muscle: biological and mathematical considerations. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  15. Essner RL (2002) Three-dimensional launch kinematics in leaping, parachuting and gliding squirrels. J Exp Biol 205(16):2469–2477PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Fischer MS, Blickhan R (2006) The tri-segmented limbs of therian mammals: kinematics, dynamics, and self-stabilization—a review. J Exp Zool A Comp Exp Zool 305(11):935–952CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fischer MS, Schilling N, Schmidt M, Haarhaus D, Witte H (2002) Basic limb kinematics of small therian mammals. J Exp Biol 205(9):1315–1338PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Fukunaga T, Ichinose Y, Ito M, Kawakami Y, Fukashiro S (1997) Determination of fascicle length and pennation in a contracting human muscle in vivo. J Appl Physiol 82(1):354–358PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Gans C, Bock WJ (1964) The functional significance of muscle architecture—a theoretical analysis. Ergebnisse der Anatomie Entwicklungsgeschichte 38:115–142Google Scholar
  20. Huq E, Wall CE, Taylor AB (2015) Epaxial muscle fiber architecture favors enhanced excursion and power in the leaper Galago senegalensis. J Anat 227(4):524–540CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Kilbourne BM, Andrada E, Fischer MS, Nyakatura JA (2016) Morphology and motion: hindlimb proportions and swing phase kinematics in terrestrially locomoting charadriiform birds. J Exp Biol 219(9):1405–1416CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Kim SY, Boynton EL, Ravichandiran K, Fung LY, Bleakney R, Agur AM (2007) Three-dimensional study of the musculotendinous architecture of supraspinatus and its functional correlations. Clin Anat 20(6):648–655CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Kupczik K, Stark H, Mundry R, Neininger FT, Heidlauf T, Röhrle O (2015) Reconstruction of muscle fascicle architecture from iodine-enhanced microCT images: a combined texture mapping and streamline approach. J Theor Biol 382:34–43CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Kuznetsov AN (1985) Comparative functional analysis of the fore- and hind limbs in mammals. Zool J Moscow 64:1862–1867Google Scholar
  25. Legreneur P, Thévenet FR, Libourel PA, Monteil KM, Montuelle S, Pouydebat E, Bels V (2010) Hindlimb interarticular coordinations in Microcebus murinus in maximal leaping. J Exp Biol 213(8):1320–1327CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Lieber RL, Blevins FT (1989) Skeletal muscle architecture of the rabbit hindlimb: functional implications of muscle design. J Morph 199(1):93–101CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Lieber RL, Fridén J (2001) Clinical significance of skeletal muscle architecture. Clin Orthop Rel Res 383:140–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Loeb GE, Pratt CA, Chanaud CM, Richmond FJR (1987) Distribution and innervation of short, interdigitated muscle fibers in parallel-fibered muscles of the cat hindlimb. J Morph 191(1):1–15CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Moore AL, Budny JE, Russell AP, Butcher MT (2013) Architectural specialization of the intrinsic thoracic limb musculature of the American badger (Taxidea taxus). J Morph 274(1):35–48CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Nowak RM (1999) Walker’s mammals of the world, 6th edn. Johns Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  31. Nyakatura JA, Stark H (2015) Aberrant back muscle function correlates with intramuscular architecture of dorsovertebral muscles in two-toed sloths. Mamm Biol 80(2):114–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ounjian M, Roy RR, Eldred E, Garfinkel A, Payne JR, Armstrong A, Edgerton VR (1991) Physiological and developmental implications of motor unit anatomy. J Neurobiol 22(5):547–559CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Payne RC, Hutchinson JR, Robilliard JJ, Smith NC, Wilson AM (2005) Functional specialisation of pelvic limb anatomy in horses (Equus caballus). J Anat 206(6):557–574CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. Payne RC, Crompton RH, Isler K, Savage R, Vereecke EE, Günther MM, D’Août K (2006) Morphological analysis of the hindlimb in apes and humans. I. Muscle architecture. J Anat 208(6):709–724PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Poelstra KA, Eijkelkamp MF, Veldhuizen AG (2000) The geometry of the human paraspinal muscles with the aid of three-dimensional computed tomography scans and 3-Space Isotrak. Spine 25(17):2176–2179CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Powell PL, Roy RR, Kanim PAULA, Bello MA, Edgerton VR (1984) Predictability of skeletal muscle tension from architectural determinations in guinea pig hindlimbs. J Appl Physiol 57(6):1715–1721PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Roach N, Kennerly R (2016) Chinchilla chinchilla. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (e.T4651A22191157) Google Scholar
  38. Roberts TJ (2002) The integrated function of muscles and tendons during locomotion. Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol 133(4):1087–1099CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Rocha-Barbosa O, De Castro Loguercio MF, Renous S, Gasc JP (2005) Limb joints kinematics and their relation to increasing speed in the guinea pig Cavia porcellus (Mammalia: Rodentia). J Zool 266(3):293–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rosatelli AL, Ravichandiran K, Agur AM (2008) Three-dimensional study of the musculotendinous architecture of lumbar multifidus and its functional implications. Clin Anat 21(6):539–546CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Rupert JE, Rose JA, Organ JM, Butcher MT (2015) Forelimb muscle architecture and myosin isoform composition in the groundhog (Marmota monax). J Exp Biol 218(2):194–205CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Sacks RD, Roy RR (1982) Architecture of the hind limb muscles of cats: functional significance. J Morph 173(2):185–195CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Scholle HC, Schumann NP, Biedermann F, Stegeman DF, Grassme R, Roeleveld K, Schilling N, Fischer MS (2001) Spatiotemporal surface EMG characteristics from rat triceps brachii muscle during treadmill locomotion indicate selective recruitment of functionally distinct muscle regions. Exp Brain Res 138(1):26–36CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Siebert T, Leichsenring K, Rode C, Wick C, Stutzig N, Schubert H, Böl M (2015). Three-dimensional muscle architecture and comprehensive dynamic properties of rabbit gastrocnemius, plantaris and soleus: input for simulation studies. PLoS one 10(6):e0130985CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. Spector SA, Gardiner PF, Zernicke RF, Roy RR, Edgerton VR (1980) Muscle architecture and force-velocity characteristics of cat soleus and medial gastrocnemius: implications for motor control. J Neurophysiol 44(5):951–960PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Spotorno AE, Zuleta CA, Valladares JP, Deane AL, Jiménez JE (2004) Chinchilla laniger. Mamm Spec 758:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Spotorno AE, Manríquez G, Fernández LA, Marín JC, González F, Wheeler J (2007) Domestication of guinea pigs from a southern Peru-northern Chile wild species and their middle pre-Columbian mummies. In: Kelt DA, Lessa EP, Salazar-Bravo J, Patton JL (eds) The Quintessential Naturalist: Honoring the Life and Legacy of Oliver P. Pearson. University of California Publications in Zoology, pp 367–388Google Scholar
  48. Stark H, Fröber R, Schilling N (2013) Intramuscular architecture of the autochthonous back muscles in humans. J Anat 222(2):214–222CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Wells JB (1965) Comparison of mechanical properties between slow and fast mammalian muscles. J Physiol 178(2):252CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. Wickiewicz TL, Roy RR, Powell PL, Edgerton VR (1983) Muscle architecture of the human lower limb. Clin Orthop Rel Res 179:275–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wickiewicz TL, Roy RR, Powell PL, Perrine JJ, Edgerton VR (1984) Muscle architecture and force-velocity relationships in humans. J Appl Physiol 57(2):435–443PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Zajac FE (1989) Muscle and tendon Properties models scaling and application to biomechanics and motor. Crit Rev Biomed Eng 17(4):359–411PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.AG Morphologie und FormengeschichteInstitut für Biologie & Bild Wissen Gestaltung. Ein interdisziplinäres LaborBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations