Se requiere una suscripción a JoVE para ver este contenido. Inicie sesión o comience su prueba gratuita.
This article details the methodology for emulating in vivo muscle force production during ex vivo work loop experiments using an "avatar" muscle from a laboratory rodent to assess the contributions of strain transients and activation to the muscle force response.
Movement behaviors are emergent features of dynamic systems that result from muscle force production and work output. The interplay between neural and mechanical systems occurs at all levels of biological organization concurrently, from the tuning of leg muscle properties while running to the dynamics of the limbs interacting with the ground. Understanding the conditions under which animals shift their neural control strategies toward intrinsic muscle mechanics ('preflexes') in the control hierarchy would allow muscle models to predict in vivo muscle force and work more accurately. To understand in vivo muscle mechanics, ex vivo investigation of muscle force and work under dynamically varying strain and loading conditions similar to in vivo locomotion is required. In vivo strain trajectories typically exhibit abrupt changes (i.e., strain and velocity transients) that arise from interactions among neural activation, musculoskeletal kinematics, and loads applied by the environment. The principal goal of our "avatar" technique is to investigate how muscles function during abrupt changes in strain rate and loading when the contribution of intrinsic mechanical properties to muscle force production may be highest. In the "avatar" technique, the traditional work-loop approach is modified using measured in vivo strain trajectories and electromyographic (EMG) signals from animals during dynamic movements to drive ex vivo muscles through multiple stretch-shortening cycles. This approach is similar to the work-loop technique, except that in vivo strain trajectories are scaled appropriately and imposed on ex vivo mouse muscles attached to a servo motor. This technique allows one to: (1) emulate in vivo strain, activation, stride frequency, and work-loop patterns; (2) vary these patterns to match in vivo force responses most accurately; and (3) vary specific features of strain and/or activation in controlled combinations to test mechanistic hypotheses.
Moving animals achieve impressive athletic feats of endurance, speed, and agility in complex environments. Animal locomotion is particularly impressive in contrast to human-engineered machines-the stability and agility of current-legged robots, prostheses, and exoskeletons remain poor compared to animals. Legged locomotion in natural terrain requires precise control and rapid adjustments to alter the speed and maneuver environmental features that act as unexpected perturbations1,2,3,4. Yet, understanding non-steady locomotion is inherently challenging because the dynamics depend on complex interactions between the physical environment, musculoskeletal mechanics, and sensorimotor control1,2. Legged locomotion requires responding to unexpected perturbations with rapid multi-modal processing of sensory information and coordinated actuation of limbs and joints1,5. Ultimately, movement is made possible by muscles producing force via intrinsic mechanical properties of the musculoskeletal system as well as from neural control1,5,6,7. An outstanding question of neuromechanics is how these factors interact to produce coordinated movement in response to unexpected perturbations. The following technique utilizes muscle's intrinsic mechanical response to deformation using in vivo strain trajectories during controllable ex vivo experiments with an "avatar" muscle.
The muscle work loop technique has provided an important framework for understanding intrinsic muscle mechanics during cyclical movements8,9,10. The traditional work loop technique drives muscles through predefined, typically sinusoidal, strain trajectories using frequencies and activation patterns measured during in vivo experiments2,8,9,11. Using sinusoidal length trajectories can realistically estimate work and power output during flight12 and swimming2 under conditions where animals do not undergo rapid changes in strain trajectories due to interaction with the environment and musculoskeletal kinematics. However, in vivo muscle strain trajectories during legged locomotion arise dynamically from interactions among neural activation, musculoskeletal kinematics, and loads applied by the environment5,7,13,14. A more realistic work loop technique is needed to emulate loads, strain trajectories, and force production that corresponds to in vivo muscle-tendon dynamics and provides insight into how intrinsic muscle mechanics and neural control interact to produce coordinated movement in the face of perturbations.
Here, we present a novel way to emulate in vivo muscle forces during treadmill locomotion by using an "avatar" muscle from a laboratory rodent during controlled ex vivo experiments with in vivo strain trajectories that represent time-varying in vivo loads. Using the measured in vivo strain trajectories from a target muscle on muscles from a laboratory animal during controlled ex vivo experiments will emulate loads experienced during locomotion. In the experiments described here, the ex vivo mouse extensor digitorum longus (EDL) muscle is used as an "avatar" for the in vivo rat medial gastrocnemius (MG) muscle during walking, trotting, and galloping on a treadmill13. This approach is similar to the work-loop technique, except that in vivo strain trajectories are scaled appropriately and imposed on ex vivo mouse muscles attached to a servo motor. While mouse EDL muscles differ in size, fiber type, and architecture compared to the rat MG, it is possible to control for these differences. The "avatar" technique allows one to: (1) emulate in vivo strain, activation, stride frequency, and work-loop patterns; (2) vary these patterns to match in vivo force responses most accurately; and (3) vary specific features of strain and/or activation in controlled combinations to test mechanistic hypotheses.
All animal studies were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee at Northern Arizona University. Extensor digitorum longus (EDL) muscles from male and female wild-type mice (strain B6C3Fe a/a-Ttnmdm/J), aged 60-280 days, were used for the present study. The animals were obtained from a commercial source (see Table of Materials), and established in a colony at Northern Arizona University.
1. Selecting in vivo strain trajectory and preparing for use during ex vivo work loop experiments
NOTE: In this protocol, prior measurements from in vivo dynamic locomotion, provided directly to the authors (Nicolai Konow, UMass Lowell, personal communication), were used in ex vivo experiments. The original data was collected for Wakeling et al.15. Time, length or strain, EMG/activation, and force data are required to replicate the protocol.
Figure 1: Length over time of in vivo whole trial. Length (mm) plotted against time of rat MG. Strides are demarcated by circles, from shortest length to shortest length, considered single stride. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
2. Evaluating maximum isometric force of mouse muscle ex vivo
Experiment | Simulation Intensity (V) | Pulse Frequency (pps / Hz) | Stimulation Duration (ms) | Comments | ||||||||
1. "Warm-Up" | 80 | 1 | 1 | Increase or decrease length by 0.50 V to find passive tension of 1 V | ||||||||
2. Optimal muscle length twitch (L0) | 80 | 1 | 1 | Increase or decrease length by 0.50 V to find passive tension of ~1 V | ||||||||
3. Optimal muscle length tetanus (L0) | 80 | 180 | 500 | Rest 3 min between changing length by 0.50 V | ||||||||
4. Pre-experiment submaximal L0 | 45 | 110 | 500 | At length of L0 | ||||||||
6. Avatar experiments | 45 | 110 | Cyclically use representative length changes for mouse EDL | |||||||||
7. Post-experiment submaximal L0 | 45 | 110 | 500 | Return to L0 after experiment and measure L0 |
Table 1: Stimulation protocol. Stimulation protocol for finding supramaximal and submaximal twitch and tetanus optimal length. Protocol varies by stimulation intensity, timing, and pulses per second.
3. Completing "avatar" work loop technique using selected in vivo strain trajectories
Figure 2: Matching passive tension rise. Work loops showing the in vivo and ex vivo rise in passive tension (arrows). In vivo scaled work loop from rat MG (black) walking at 2.9 Hz (data from Wakeling et al.15). Ex vivo scaled work loops from mouse EDL (green) at 2.9 Hz. (A) Starting length of mouse EDL muscle is +5% L0. (B) Starting length of the mouse EDL muscle is L0. Note that the ex vivo passive tension rise matches the in vivo tension rise in A but not in B. Thicker lines indicate stimulation. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 3: Optimizing stimulation duration of mouse EDL to match in vivo force of rat MG (black line). The force generated by the mouse EDL using the EMG-based stimulation (green dashed line) decreases earlier than the in vivo force, likely due to faster deactivation of the mouse EDL compared to rat MG. To optimize the fit between the in vivo and ex vivo forces, the mouse EDL was stimulated for a longer duration (solid green line). EMG-based stimulation R2 = 0.55, Optimized stimulation R2 = 0.91. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
The goal of the "avatar" experiments is to replicate in vivo force production and work output as closely as possible during ex vivo work loop experiments. This study chose to use mouse EDL as an "avatar" for rat MG because mouse EDL and rat MG are both comprised of mostly of fast-twitch muscles20,21. Both muscles are primary movers of the ankle joint (EDL ankle dorsiflexor, MG ankle plantarflexor) with similar pennation angles (m...
While organisms move seamlessly across landscapes, the underlying loads and strains that the muscles experience vary drastically1,6,23. During both in vivo locomotion1,24 and in "avatar" experiments, muscles are stimulated submaximally under cyclical, non-steady conditions. The isometric force-length and isotonic force-velocity relationships are not well...
All authors acknowledge there is no conflict of interest.
We thank Dr. Nicolai Konow for providing the data used in this study. Funded by NSF IOS-2016049 and NSF DBI-2021832.
Name | Company | Catalog Number | Comments |
Braided Non-Absorbable Silk Suture 4-0 | Mersilk | 734H | |
Calcium Chloride Dihydrate (CaCl2) | Sigma-Aldrich | 1086436 | Krebs-Henseleit solution |
Dextrose | Sigma-Aldrich | D9434 | Krebs-Henseleit solution |
HEPES | Sigma-Aldrich | PHR1428 | Krebs-Henseleit solution |
Hydorchloric Acid (HCl) | Sigma-Aldrich | 1.37055 | Krebs-Henseleit solution |
LabView Data Collection | Lab-View | ||
Magnesium Sulfate (MgSO4) | Sigma-Aldrich | M7506 | Krebs-Henseleit solution |
Potassium Chloride (KCl) | Sigma-Aldrich | P3911 | Krebs-Henseleit solution |
Potassium Phosphate Monobasic (KH2PO4) | Sigma-Aldrich | 5.43841 | Krebs-Henseleit solution |
S88 Stimulator | Grass | M643H05 | Available for purchase on Ebay |
Series 300B Lever System | Aurora | 1200A | includes water-jacket tissue bath |
Sodium Bicarbonate (NaHCO3) | Sigma-Aldrich | S5761 | Krebs-Henseleit solution |
Sodium Chloride (NaCl) | Sigma-Aldrich | S9888 | Krebs-Henseleit solution |
Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH) | Sigma-Aldrich | S5881 | Krebs-Henseleit solution |
Wild Type Mice | Jackson Laboratory | B6C3Fe a/a Ttn mdm/J |
Solicitar permiso para reutilizar el texto o las figuras de este JoVE artículos
Solicitar permisoExplorar más artículos
This article has been published
Video Coming Soon
ACERCA DE JoVE
Copyright © 2025 MyJoVE Corporation. Todos los derechos reservados