Image_1_Sarcolemmal Excitability, M-Wave Changes, and Conduction Velocity During a Sustained Low-Force Contraction.TIF
This study was undertaken to investigate whether sarcolemmal excitability is impaired during a sustained low-force contraction [10% maximal voluntary contraction (MVC)] by assessing muscle conduction velocity and also by analyzing separately the first and second phases of the muscle compound action potential (M wave). Twenty-one participants sustained an isometric knee extension of 10% MVC for 3min. M waves were evoked by supramaximal single shocks to the femoral nerve given at 10-s intervals. The amplitude, duration, and area of the first and second M-wave phases were computed. Muscle fiber conduction velocity, voluntary surface electromyographic (EMG), perceived effort, MVC force, peak twitch force, and temperature were also recorded. The main findings were: (1) During the sustained contraction, conduction velocity remained unchanged. (2) The amplitude of the M-wave first phase decreased for the first ~30s (−7%, p<0.05) and stabilized thereafter, whereas the second phase amplitude increased for the initial ~30s (+7%, p<0.05), before stabilizing. (3) Both duration and area decreased steeply during the first ~30s, and then more gradually for the rest of the contraction. (4) During the sustained contraction, perceived effort increased fivefold, whereas knee extension EMG increased by ~10%. (5) Maximal voluntary force and peak twitch force decreased (respectively, −9% and −10%, p<0.05) after the low-force contraction. Collectively, the present results indicate that sarcolemmal excitability is well preserved during a sustained 10% MVC task. A depression of the M-wave first phase during a low-force contraction can occur even in the absence of changes in membrane excitability. The development of fatigue during a low-force contraction can occur without alteration of membrane excitability.
History
References
- https://doi.org//10.1002/mus.880120610
- https://doi.org//10.1073/pnas.0709212105
- https://doi.org//10.1002/mus.880070902
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.jelekin.2004.10.004
- https://doi.org//10.1007/BF02337176
- https://doi.org//10.1152/japplphysiol.00022.2012
- https://doi.org//10.1113/expphysiol.2010.054999
- https://doi.org//10.1113/jphysiol.1996.sp021238
- https://doi.org//10.1007/BF00357632
- https://doi.org//10.1152/jappl.2002.92.1.235
- https://doi.org//10.1109/TBME.2007.892928
- https://doi.org//10.1152/japplphysiol.00739.2017
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s10439-009-9756-4
- https://doi.org//10.1002/mus.10375
- https://doi.org//10.1113/jphysiol.2003.057711
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s00221-003-1678-z
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S1050-6411%2801%2900005-0
- https://doi.org//10.1007/BF00237177
- https://doi.org//10.1152/japplphysiol.00418.2004
- https://doi.org//10.1152/jappl.2001.91.1.277
- https://doi.org//10.1113/jphysiol.1991.sp018721
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s00421-005-1366-8
- https://doi.org//10.1152/japplphysiol.00604.2002
- https://doi.org//10.1109/TBME.1985.325614
- https://doi.org//10.1109/TBME.2006.870256
- https://doi.org//10.1590/S0100-879X2000000500003
- https://doi.org//10.1113/jphysiol.2008.150698
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.jelekin.2016.08.003
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s11517-013-1112-z
- https://doi.org//10.1002/mus.25186
- https://doi.org//10.1111/sms.12819
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s00421-017-3788-5
- https://doi.org//10.1055/s-0034-1375614
- https://doi.org//10.1002/%28SICI%291097-4598%28200001%2923%3A1%3C115%3A%3AAID-MUS16%3E3.0.CO;2-5
- https://doi.org//10.1007/BF00635992
- https://doi.org//10.1152/japplphysiol.00220.2007
- https://doi.org//10.1113/jphysiol.2005.103598
- https://doi.org//10.1111/j.1469-7793.1998.919bs.x
- https://doi.org//10.1002/mus.880160312
- https://doi.org//10.1007/BF00656721