A mechanically consistent muscle model shows that the maximum force-generating capacity of muscles is influenced by optimal fascicle length and muscle shape
Bart Bolsterlee , Rob Lloyd , Lynne E. Bilston , Robert D Herbert
{"title":"A mechanically consistent muscle model shows that the maximum force-generating capacity of muscles is influenced by optimal fascicle length and muscle shape","authors":"Bart Bolsterlee , Rob Lloyd , Lynne E. Bilston , Robert D Herbert","doi":"10.1016/j.jbiomech.2025.112584","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Muscle forces are difficult to measure in vivo, so the force-generating capacity of muscles is commonly inferred from muscle architecture. It is often assumed, implicitly or explicity, that a muscle’s maximum force-generating capacity is proportional to physiological cross-sectional area (PCSA), and that a muscle’s operating range is proportional to mean optimal fascicle length. Here, we examined the effect of muscle architecture (PCSA and fascicle length) on muscle function (maximal isometric force and operating range) using a three-dimensional finite element model which accounts in a mechanically consistent way for muscle deformation and other complexities of muscle contraction. By varying architectural properties independently, it was shown that muscle force-generating capacity does not scale by the same factor as PCSA, and that operating range does not scale by the same factor as optimal fascicle length. For instance, 3-fold independent variation of mean optimal fascicle length caused the maximum isometric force-generating capacity of the muscle to vary from 83% to 105% of the force predicted by PCSA alone. Non-uniformities in fascicle length that develop as the muscle deforms during contraction reduce muscle force and operating range. Thus, a three-dimensional finite element model that satisfies fundamental physical constraints predicts that the maximum force-generating capacity of skeletal muscle depends on factors other than PCSA, and that operating range depends on factors other than optimal fascicle length. These findings have implications for how the force-generating properties of animal muscles are scaled to human muscles, and for how the functional capacity of muscles is predicted from muscle architecture.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15168,"journal":{"name":"Journal of biomechanics","volume":"182 ","pages":"Article 112584"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929025000958","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Muscle forces are difficult to measure in vivo, so the force-generating capacity of muscles is commonly inferred from muscle architecture. It is often assumed, implicitly or explicity, that a muscle’s maximum force-generating capacity is proportional to physiological cross-sectional area (PCSA), and that a muscle’s operating range is proportional to mean optimal fascicle length. Here, we examined the effect of muscle architecture (PCSA and fascicle length) on muscle function (maximal isometric force and operating range) using a three-dimensional finite element model which accounts in a mechanically consistent way for muscle deformation and other complexities of muscle contraction. By varying architectural properties independently, it was shown that muscle force-generating capacity does not scale by the same factor as PCSA, and that operating range does not scale by the same factor as optimal fascicle length. For instance, 3-fold independent variation of mean optimal fascicle length caused the maximum isometric force-generating capacity of the muscle to vary from 83% to 105% of the force predicted by PCSA alone. Non-uniformities in fascicle length that develop as the muscle deforms during contraction reduce muscle force and operating range. Thus, a three-dimensional finite element model that satisfies fundamental physical constraints predicts that the maximum force-generating capacity of skeletal muscle depends on factors other than PCSA, and that operating range depends on factors other than optimal fascicle length. These findings have implications for how the force-generating properties of animal muscles are scaled to human muscles, and for how the functional capacity of muscles is predicted from muscle architecture.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Biomechanics publishes reports of original and substantial findings using the principles of mechanics to explore biological problems. Analytical, as well as experimental papers may be submitted, and the journal accepts original articles, surveys and perspective articles (usually by Editorial invitation only), book reviews and letters to the Editor. The criteria for acceptance of manuscripts include excellence, novelty, significance, clarity, conciseness and interest to the readership.
Papers published in the journal may cover a wide range of topics in biomechanics, including, but not limited to:
-Fundamental Topics - Biomechanics of the musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, and respiratory systems, mechanics of hard and soft tissues, biofluid mechanics, mechanics of prostheses and implant-tissue interfaces, mechanics of cells.
-Cardiovascular and Respiratory Biomechanics - Mechanics of blood-flow, air-flow, mechanics of the soft tissues, flow-tissue or flow-prosthesis interactions.
-Cell Biomechanics - Biomechanic analyses of cells, membranes and sub-cellular structures; the relationship of the mechanical environment to cell and tissue response.
-Dental Biomechanics - Design and analysis of dental tissues and prostheses, mechanics of chewing.
-Functional Tissue Engineering - The role of biomechanical factors in engineered tissue replacements and regenerative medicine.
-Injury Biomechanics - Mechanics of impact and trauma, dynamics of man-machine interaction.
-Molecular Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of biomolecules.
-Orthopedic Biomechanics - Mechanics of fracture and fracture fixation, mechanics of implants and implant fixation, mechanics of bones and joints, wear of natural and artificial joints.
-Rehabilitation Biomechanics - Analyses of gait, mechanics of prosthetics and orthotics.
-Sports Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of sports performance.