QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s):
Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents

First published online September 14, 2007
Journal of Experimental Biology 210, 3361-3373 (2007)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2007
doi: 10.1242/jeb.003970

This Article Summary Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by DeVita, P. Articles by Hortobagyi, T. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by DeVita, P. Articles by Hortobagyi, T.

Muscles do more positive than negative work in human locomotion

Paul DeVita^*, Joseph Helseth and Tibor Hortobagyi

Biomechanics Laboratory, Department of Exercise and Sport Science, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC 27858, USA

View larger version (14K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Joint powers in shoulder (A) and squat (B) movements. Both cyclic activities had positive and negative joint powers that were associated with lowering and raising either one upper extremity or all body mass above the ankles. (C) Total positive and negative joint work were virtually identical in the negative and positive phases of the shoulder and squat tasks (i.e. differences were less than 1%). These data strongly suggest that positive and negative joint and muscle work can be equivalent in certain uni- and multi-joint, cyclic movements.

View larger version (13K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 2. (A,C) Summed joint torque (A) and joint power (C) and (B,D) individual hip (broken line), knee (solid line) and ankle (dotted line) joint torques (B) and joint powers (D) during the stance phase of level walking averaged across all subjects. Positive torques are extensors and positive powers are energy generation. Summed torque showed extensor bias throughout most of stance that was produced primarily by hip and knee extensor torques in early stance and ankle plantarflexor torque in late stance. Individual joint powers showed that each joint torque generated and dissipated energy during the stance phase. Summed joint power showed alternating positive and negative work phases, with the largest power magnitude being the positive power in late stance.

View larger version (5K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Mean hip, knee, ankle and total joint work in level walking across all subjects. Values are means ± s.d. Muscles at each joint produced both negative and positive work during the stance phase of level walking. Net work was negative at the knee but positive at the hip and ankle. Total net work was positive at 16.2 J. The magnitudes of negative and positive work were significantly different at each joint; the asterisk indicates the larger value (P<0.010).

View larger version (22K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Individual and summed joint torque (A) and power (B) curves during the stance phases of ramp descent (broken lines) and ascent (solid lines) walking, averaged across all subjects. Positive torques are extensors and positive powers are energy generation. Summed torques were similar in shape and magnitude and showed that both gaits were produced by net extensor torques across all joints. Hip and ankle extensor torques were larger in ascent vs descent, whereas knee extensor torque was larger in descent. Summed powers in ramp descent and ascent were nearly entirely negative and positive, respectively. The individual joint powers, however, showed that muscles crossing each joint contributed both negative and positive power and work to both movements. Negative power occurred primarily at the knee and then ankle joints in descent whereas positive power occurred primarily at the ankle and hip joints in ascent. Ramp descent had a 15% shorter stance phase, partially leading to reduced area under the joint power curves and reduced muscle work compared to ramp ascent.

View larger version (12K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Mean joint work in ramp gait across all subjects. Values are means ± s.d. Knee muscles were the primary energy dissipaters in ramp descent, performing 58% and 81% of the negative and net muscular work, respectively. Ankle and hip muscles were the primary energy generators in ramp ascent combining to perform 86% and 95% of the positive and net work, respectively. Negative work in ramp ascent was relatively evenly distributed among the muscle groups, whereas positive work in descent was produced primarily (i.e. 62%) by the ankle muscles.

View larger version (23K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Individual and summed joint torque (A) and power (B) curves during the stance phases of stair descent (broken lines) and ascent (solid lines) walking averaged across all subjects. Positive torques are extensors and positive powers are energy generation. Summed torques were similar in shape and showed that both gaits were produced by net extensor torques across all joints. Hip and ankle torques were similar in the stair gaits, whereas knee torque had one larger extensor phase in ascent and two smaller extensor phases in descent. As in ramp gait, summed powers in stair descent and ascent were nearly entirely negative and positive, respectively. In contrast to ramp gait, there was minimal power and work at the hip on the stairs. Energy dissipation in stair descent was done at the ankle joint in early stance and at the knee joint in later stance. Stair ascent was produced by positive power and work at the knee joint in early stance and at the ankle joint in later stance. Stair descent had an 8% shorter stance phase, partially leading to reduced area under the joint power curves and reduced muscle work compared to stair ascent.

View larger version (11K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Mean joint work in stair gait across all subjects. Values are means ± s.d. Knee and ankle muscles were the primary energy dissipators and generators in stair descent and ascent. They performed 92% and 95% of the negative and net muscular work in descent, respectively and 85% and 87% of the positive and net muscular work in ascent, respectively. As in ramp walking, negative work in ramp ascent was relatively evenly distributed among the muscle groups, whereas positive work in descent was produced primarily (i.e. 73%) by the ankle muscles.

View larger version (4K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 8. Mean total joint work in both ascending and descending gaits (in |J| m–1 for ramp, and |J| step–1 for stairs) across all subjects. Values are means ± s.d. Ascent work was 25% (*P<0.010) and 43% (*P<0.000) greater than descent work in ramp and stair gait, respectively.

View larger version (7K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 9. Mean normal GRFs (N) for ramp and stairway walking averaged across all subjects. Descending gaits had larger first maximum forces and greater rates of force application during the initial portion of the stance phase. These forces produced higher accelerations of the body mass compared to those in the ascending gaits.