1981
DOI: 10.1016/0306-4522(81)90156-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effect of long-term immobilization on the motor unit population of the cat medial gastrocnemius muscle

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
35
1
3

Year Published

1990
1990
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 58 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
0
35
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…5 which also shows that the decrease in A firing rate after immobilization is larger in motor units of low recruitment threshold and large frequency modulation as compared to motor units of higher threshold and lower frequency modulation. Decrease in maximal firing rate could be explained by changes in proprioceptive afferents on the motoneurons (Mayer, Burke, Toop, Hodgson, Kanda & Walmsley, 1981) and/or MOTOR UNIT BEHA VIOUR AFTER IMMOBILIZATION reduced ability to activate motor units (Fuglsang-Frederiksen & Scheel, 1978;Sale et al 1982). This last point was suggested by the finding after immobilization of a smaller reflex potentiation which is closely controlled by the central drive (Upton, McComas & Sica, 1971).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…5 which also shows that the decrease in A firing rate after immobilization is larger in motor units of low recruitment threshold and large frequency modulation as compared to motor units of higher threshold and lower frequency modulation. Decrease in maximal firing rate could be explained by changes in proprioceptive afferents on the motoneurons (Mayer, Burke, Toop, Hodgson, Kanda & Walmsley, 1981) and/or MOTOR UNIT BEHA VIOUR AFTER IMMOBILIZATION reduced ability to activate motor units (Fuglsang-Frederiksen & Scheel, 1978;Sale et al 1982). This last point was suggested by the finding after immobilization of a smaller reflex potentiation which is closely controlled by the central drive (Upton, McComas & Sica, 1971).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other reports describe immobilized cat units that produce weak tetanic forces and EMG with no measurable twitch force. 11,15,21 In contrast, those triceps brachii muscles with a manual score of 3 or higher can have functional impact. If these muscles contain only a few excitable units, they must be driven almost maximally to generate forces that are useful in everyday tasks.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…Pierre and Gardiner, 1985). However, a few studies demonstrated equal (Sjostrom et al, 1979;Mayer et al, 1981;Lindboe and Platou, 1982;Spector et al, 1982) or greater effects of immobilization on Type I1 fibers (Karpati and Engel, 1968;Herbison et al, 1978). Early cast removal did not minimize the extent of muscle atrophy.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%