Skeletal Muscle Architecture of the Rabbit Hindlimb: Functional Implications of Muscle Design
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
The muscle-fiber architecture of 29 muscles from six rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) was measured in order to describe the muscular properties of this cursorial animal, which possesses several specific skeletal adaptations. Several muscles were placed into one of four functional groups: hamstrings, quadriceps, dorsiflexors, or plantarflexors, for statistical comparison of properties between groups. Antagonistic groups (i.e., hamstrings vs. quadriceps or dorsiflexors vs. plantarflexors) demonstrated significant differences in fiber length, fiber length/muscle length ratio, muscle mass, pinnation angle, and number of sarcomeres in series (P less than .02). Discriminant analysis permitted characterization of the "typical" muscle belonging to one of the four groups. The quadriceps were characterized by their large pinnation angles and low fiber length/mass ratios, suggesting a design for force production. Conversely, the hamstrings, with small pinnation angles, appeared to be designed to permit large excursions. Similar differences were observed between plantarflexors and dorsiflexors, which have architectural features that suit them for force production and excursion respectively. Although these differences were not absolute, they represented clear morphological distinctions that have functional consequences.
Harley-Troxell M, Steiner R, Newby S, Bow A, Masi T, Millis N Pharmaceutics. 2024; 16(10).
PMID: 39458586 PMC: 11510652. DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics16101254.
Easton K, Hatch C, Stephens K, Marler D, Fidelis O, Sun X J Orthop Surg Res. 2024; 19(1):108.
PMID: 38303012 PMC: 10836017. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-024-04581-7.
Effect of polyester-based artificial tendons on movement biomechanics: A preliminary in vivo study.
Hall P, Stubbs C, Pedersen A, Billings C, Stephenson S, Greenacre C J Biomech. 2023; 151:111520.
PMID: 36944293 PMC: 10150316. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2023.111520.
From fibre to function: are we accurately representing muscle architecture and performance?.
Charles J, Kissane R, Hoehfurtner T, Bates K Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2022; 97(4):1640-1676.
PMID: 35388613 PMC: 9540431. DOI: 10.1111/brv.12856.
Architectural model for muscle growth during maturation.
Papenkort S, Bol M, Siebert T Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2021; 20(5):2031-2044.
PMID: 34302567 PMC: 8450218. DOI: 10.1007/s10237-021-01492-y.